7Th Week Hilary Term 2020 Student Council

7th Week Hilary Term 2020 Student Council

TIME: 17:30 DATE: Wednesday 4th March LOCATION: Britton Room, Lawns Pavilion, Trinity College

If you have any questions about Student Council, please feel free to contact: Chair of Council: [email protected] Student Engagement Coordinators: [email protected] Disability Contact: Disability Coordinator, [email protected]

Project Bid Pot: £1235 remaining a. Minutes of the previous meeting b. Elections in council c. Reports from and questions to Sabbatical Trustees d. Report from the Trustee Board e. Report from Scrutiny Committee f. Reports from and questions to Campaign for Racial Awareness and Equality and Suspended Students’ Campaign g. Reports from and questions to Humanities Divisional Representatives h. Items for resolution 1. Motion to Amend Bye-Law 31 (Media Services) 2. Motion to trigger a by-election for NUS Delegates 3. To establish the Divestment Project as an SU Project 4. Approve reports from SU Projects a) TABOU Disability Magazine b) Oxford Migrant Solidarity c) BSL classes d) TSHA Free Library e) Homelessness Awareness Project 5. Ban Beef 6. Academic Hate Speech motion 7. Housing Justice in Oxford 8. Re-mandate the SU President to speak in favour of abolishing the post- graduate application fee 9. Establish ‘Walk in my shoes: The Oxford BAME Experience’ as an SU Project Below the line 10. Approve the It Happens Here Campaign Constitution 11. Renew the Oxford Living Wage Project i. Items for discussion j. Any other business

Page Break a. Minutes of the previous meeting b. Elections in Council Chair of Council - Chair of Council is elected in 7th Week Council each term to serve for the following term. They are responsible for the running, operation, and pre-planning of the meeting as well as sitting on Steering Committee. Council’s decisions have an impact across all levels of both the University and the Student Union, and as Chair you will be responsible for ensuring that this student decision making body is as effective as it can be.

Returning Officer - The Returning Officer plays a crucial role in upholding and maintaining Oxford SU’s democratic structures. Throughout the year you will have the main say in all things electoral, from elections in Council, to the Annual Elections in Hilary. You will chair the Elections Committee as well as resolving complaints and disputes within the Annual Elections. This is one of the most crucial student volunteer roles within Oxford SU.

Steering Committee (x2) - Steering Committee is comprised of two elected student steering members, the Chair, the President, and the Returning Officer. Steering is the committee tasked with deciding the agenda for the coming Council. They meet the week before to discuss whether submissions should make it to the agenda, whether they need to be amended, or whether they require ‘steering’ to another committee first. Steering are also the group responsible for ensuring that an All Student Consultation is held, if called for.

Scrutiny Committee (x1) - Scrutiny are elected at the start of Michaelmas to serve for the entire academic year. It is their task to interview the Sabbatical officers at the end of each term and ensure that they are doing the job they have been elected to do. Scrutiny will craft a report to be delivered to Council in 7th Week of each term. c. Reports from and questions to Sabbatical Trustees d. Report from the Trustee Board e. Report from Scrutiny Committee f. Reports from and questions to Campaign for Racial Awareness and Equality and Suspended Students’ Campaign g. Reports from and questions to Humanities Divisional Representatives h. Items for resolution

1. Motion to Amend Bye-Law 31 (Media Services)

Council Notes: 1. 'The Oxford Student' newspaper and Oxide Radio constitute Oxford SU's 'Media Services'. 2. Oxford SU has a Media Board with various responsibilities relating to these services. 3. The Bye-Laws do not reflect how these responsibilities are carried out in practice and there is no accompanying Terms of Reference for the Media Board to provide clarity.

Council Believes: 1. That the Media Board as it currently functions is not fit for purpose. 2. That Oxford SU should have a Media Board that is able to plan for the future. 3. That the Media Board should draw from the experience of those who have had a high level of involvement in the Media Services. 4. That individuals should be able to have confidence in the Media Board’s ability to address complaints.

Council Resolves: 1. To amend the Bye-Laws per this motion (Appendix A).

Proposer: Ray Williams, Oxford SU Seconder: Neil Misra, Oxford SU

2. Motion to trigger a by-election for NUS Delegates

Council Notes: 1. Oxford SU is entitled to send 7 NUS Delegates to NUS Conference in April with one automatically being the President. 2. NUS requires delegates to be elected via cross-campus ballot. 3. At the Oxford SU Annual Elections earlier this year, only three candidates stood for six available positions for NUS Delegates. One of these candidates was RON’d meaning only two were elected to the six available positions.

Council Believes: 1. The returning of RON from the election is a mandate from the student body to run a by-election. 2. It is important that every effort is made to send to NUS Conference the full number of delegates that Oxford SU is entitled to send

Council Resolves: 1. To declare a vacancy for the 4 currently unfilled positions for NUS Delegate before the NUS Conference in April.

Proposer: Anisha Faruk, Oxford SU Seconder: Kaya Axelsson, Oxford SU

3. To establish the Divestment Project as an SU Project

Council Notes: 1. That the firm weight of the evidence, and as a result the scientific consensus on the matter, states that anthropogenic global warming is an imminent threat, which is already negatively affecting some of the most marginalised people on the planet, and that this is largely the result of greenhouse gas emissions from the fossil fuels sector. 2. That in spite of this, neither the central Oxford University Endowment Management Fund nor any constituent Colleges’ endowments (bar three) have divested from the oil and gas industry, nor from any company which will not produce a net zero carbon emissions plan.

Council Believes:

1. That any responsible investment strategy on the part of the University and its constituent Colleges ought to include divestment from any company which will continue to contribute to the problem of anthropogenic global warming (i.e. not produce a credible net zero plan), and especially from the fossil fuels industry. 2. That the Oxford University Endowment Management Fund, and the management of individual constituent Colleges’ endowments, should reflect the above.

Council Resolves: 1. To establish the OCJC Divestment Project as an SU Project (Appendix B) and allocate an additional £20 from the Project Bid Pot.

Proposer: Heather Woods, Magdalen College Seconder: Benedict Fellows, Pembroke College

4. Approve reports from SU Projects

a) TABOU Disability Magazine (Appendix C) b) Oxford Migrant Solidarity (Appendix D) c) BSL classes (Appendix E) d) TSHA Free Library (Appendix F) e) Homelessness Awareness Project (Appendix G)

5. Ban Beef

Council Notes: 1. Just like humans, cows form close friendships, and they grieve when their friends or family members die. Yet in the beef industry, families are torn apart, calves are mutilated, and many cows are slaughtered when they’re just 18 months old. 2. Raising and killing cows for their flesh is also destroying our planet. The production of beef is responsible for more greenhouse-gas emissions than that of any other food – a staggering 40 times more than the production of beans or peas. The beef industry is a major contributor to the Amazon rainforest fires, deforestation, drought, and water and air pollution. 3. That we follow the example of both Cambridge and LSE in banning beef.

Council Believes: 1. That beef is harmful to the planet. 2. That the university's meat consumption should be reduced.

Council Resolves: 1. To make the following SU policy: The Vice President for Charities and Community will campaign for removal of beef products in buttery's for the environment, student health and animal welfare - following the example set by Cambridge, Goldsmith’s and LSE. LSE passed this policy through their Student Union. These campaign will include will not be limited to: - Informing staff and students within the University as to Oxford SU’s support for banning beef and the purposes and reasoning behind our adoption of this policy. - Articles and other appropriate material will be included in publications and websites managed by Oxford SU. - Raising awareness of the benefits of banning beef to health and the environment. - Meeting regularly with university authorities to campaign for banning beef on a university level. - Ensure that the removal of beef accompanies a replacement with plant based options instead of different meat options. - Campaign to get meat reduction added to Oxford’s sustainable food policy.

More specifically, Oxford SU will campaign for:

- The University to have an official policy surrounding meat reduction, reviewed annually. - The University to look into supplying plant based products in all its cafes and shops, and at all university events. - The central University to advise departments on how to begin banning beef in cafes and buttery’s.

Proposer: Megan Griffiths, University College Seconder: Jon Stocks, University College

Trigger Warning: ABLEISM, TRANSPHOBIA, CLASSISM, MISOGYNY, EUGENICS, HARASSMENT

6. Academic Hate Speech motion

Council Notes: 1. Current Oxford University policy on academic free speech protects most, if not all, academic speech so long as it is within the law. 2. There are no guidelines to the setting of reading lists by the University, nor any rules about whether students should be required to attend tutorials, seminars, or lectures during which content prejudicial on the grounds of race, religion, disability, sexual orientation, gender identity, cisgender/transgender status, or socioeconomic background is going to be discussed. 3. Much speech that is prejudicial to members of the aforementioned disadvantaged groups is not prohibited by the criminal law, which only creates offences of stirring up hatred against a particular protected group when that group is defined by race, religion, or sexual orientation. Notably, it does not prohibit ableist, misogynistic, classist or transphobic hate speech. 4. There are many examples of ableist, transphobic, classist, and misogynistic content being included on reading lists. For example, an article advocating for a moral duty not to have disabled children, entitled “Why We Should Pick the Best Children” was included on the FHS Medical Law and Ethics reading list, along with an article advocating for the murder of disabled children after they have been born.

Council Believes: 1. Any legal framework which does not criminalise speech that discriminates on transphobic, ableist, or misogynistic grounds is deficient, and should not be the starting point for university policy. 2. The relevant hate speech legislation should be amended to cover those groups, but, failing that, internal university policy should secure parity between protected characteristic groups so far as it legally can. 3. Notwithstanding the Education (No 2) Act 1986, there is considerable scope for the University, acting within the law, to ensure that trans and non-binary people, women, and disabled people receive equivalent protection from hateful speech within University contexts as groups which are protected by the criminal law, in particular the Public Order Act 1986. 4. Particularly, free speech based arguments based either on the Education Act or the University free speech policy are inapplicable when students to whom the speech is directed are required by the University to listen to the speech in question (because student attendance is taken, or the material is subject to examination). 5. In any case the University should be able to publish non-binding guidance to Faculties producing reading lists asking them to consider whether the content they are requiring their students to read amounts to hate speech.

Council Resolves: 1. To create a new SU Policy, entitled “Protection of Transgender, Non-binary, Disabled, Working-class, and Women* Students from Hatred in University Contexts”. The contents of this new policy are set out in Appendix H. 2. To mandate VP Access and Academic Affairs & VP Welfare & Equal Opportunities to issue a statement (1) condemning the use of hateful material in mandatory teaching, and (2) highlighting that many of the groups against whom the speech is directed are not currently protected by criminal legislation, and that therefore use of criminal legislation as a benchmark for academic free speech is insufficient to protect many disadvantaged groups within the University against speech which causes them harm.

Proposer: Alex Illsley, Co Chair of LGBTQ+ Campaign Seconder: Leo Gillard, Secretary of Disabilities Campaign

7. Housing Justice in Oxford

Council Notes: 1. The University and colleges have deepened the housing crisis in Oxford by actions such as accumulating property in the Oxford city centre, contributing to closing down social housing blocks, including Farndon Court in (Oxford’s only social housing for women), owning and investing in non-affordable housing developments in and outside Oxford, installing hostile architecture preventing rough sleepers and other public space users from staying near University or college properties. 2. One of the University’s aims, as stated in its Strategic Plan is ‘to build a stronger and more constructive relationship with our local and regional community’ (http://www.ox.ac.uk/about/organisation/strategic-plan-2018- 23/engagement-and-partnership). 3. As per the Oxford Student Union Policy (https://www.oxfordsu.org/your- union/governing-documents/), the Oxford Student Union believes that ‘Prevention is always better than cure. Every opportunity should be taken to prevent people from sleeping rough.’, as well as ‘The best way to help rough sleepers is to provide the accommodation and support they need to help them off the streets, to rebuild their lives, and to prevent a return to street homelessness.’, and ‘We will listen to and treat with respect all those who share our vision to ensure that nobody has to sleep rough on the streets of Oxford.’

Council Believes: 1. The University and colleges must hold themselves accountable for their role in shaping the city, students also have a responsibility to speak up against inequality in Oxford. 2. Oxford students have the agency to make a difference in Oxford and many students are committed to making the city more liveable for everyone. 3. The University and colleges should build 50% affordable housing with any new build projects, as per local policy requirements. 4. The University and colleges should pay all college staff the Oxford living wage in order to allow them to live in Oxford and provide for their families, and develop inclusive recruitment policies for homeless residents. 5. The University and colleges should contribute, collectively, sufficient funding for long-term affordable shelter for women and families in Oxford to replace the lost units at Farndon Court. 6. The University and colleges should follow their active peers to donate (or allow the meanwhile use of) their empty spaces for temporary community spaces and long-term housing projects, especially successful models of housing provision such as Housing First. 7. The University and colleges should commit to stop using hostile architecture in their building projects and remove existing spikes and other hostile details.

Council Resolves: 1. To endorse ‘A Call for Housing Justice in Oxford’ open letter addressed to the University of Oxford and the colleges, which would result in mandating a Sabbatical Trustee to sign the letter on behalf of the Student Union on change.org [http://chng.it/tq7CdBF6]. 2. To make the following Policy (the following passage would become a part of the Community section of the Policy document): “Housing Justice in Oxford Oxford SU is a signatory to the “Call for Housing Justice in Oxford” open letter to the University and colleges. The SU believes that, and calls the University and colleges to take action as follows: 1. The University and colleges must hold themselves accountable for their role in shaping the city, students also have a responsibility to speak up against inequality in Oxford. 2. Oxford students have the agency to make a difference in Oxford and many students are committed to making the city more liveable for everyone. 3. The University and colleges should build 50% affordable housing with any new build projects, as per local policy requirements 4. The University and colleges should pay all college staff the Oxford living wage in order to allow them to live in Oxford and provide for their families, and develop inclusive recruitment policies for homeless residents. 5. The University and colleges should contribute, collectively, sufficient funding for long-term affordable shelter for women and families in Oxford to replace the lost units at Farndon Court. 6. The University and colleges should follow their active peers to donate (or allow the meanwhile use of) their empty spaces for temporary community spaces and long-term housing projects, especially successful models of housing provision such as Housing First. 7. The University and colleges should commit to stop using hostile architecture in their building projects and remove existing spikes and other hostile details.”

Proposer: Barbara Tanska, St Edmund Hall Seconder: Linda Worden, Jesus College

8. Establish ‘Walk in my shoes: The Oxford BAME Experience’ as an SU Project

Council Notes: 1. At Council Wk. 3 HT a motion was passed mandating the VP(Graduates) to speak at Congregation on behalf of the SU in support of abolishing the graduate application fee 2. That older council mandates and “internal SU policy” apparently mandate that speaking at Congregation is not permitted on industrial action days, of which March 10 is one 3. That the current UCU strike is about equality and fair working conditions. 4. That the majority of casualised workers in the university are PG students 5. That many UCU members (including the motion’s proposer and seconder) will be attending Congregation on the strike day to vote for abolishing the application fee 6. That the VP (Graduates) has made clear that he personally does not wish this motion to succeed and hence is in an awkward position 7. That a statement of support from a striking UCU members is included in the Appendix.

Council Believes: 1. That the point of the strike is to improve working conditions for casualised workers by all possible means 2. That speaking at Congregation is in line with the aims of the UCU strike and is in the best interest of students 3. That the perceived clash in policy may not actually exist, as the Wk 5 MT 19 policy (reaffirming Wk 7 TT17) calls on the SU to best support graduate students who work 4. That the UCU cause is worthy and worthwhile of support 5. That sometimes, mandates for supporting equality and diversity conflict, and in this case, the SU position should be that which is most beneficial to students 6. That in the event that of a clash in SU policy, it is for council to democratically determine the optimal solution

Council Resolves: 1. That any perceived inconsistency in SU policy be rectified by re-mandating the SU President (who voted in favour in the original motion) to speak in favour of the motion at Congregation on an industrial action day

Proposer: Benjamin Fernando, (MPLS PG) Seconder: Rebecca Colquhoun (MPLS UG), Ebie Edwards Cole (New)

9. Establish ‘Walk in my shoes: The Oxford BAME Experience’ as an SU Project

Council Notes: 1. Students from Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic (BAME) backgrounds are often left out of decision-making conversations relating to the improvement of their experience at Oxford. 2. There is a lack of information on this group’s Oxford experience available, which creates room for myths and imposed narratives. 3. The conversation around the BAME student experience is currently problem- focused.

Council Believes: 1. The promotion of a solution-focused conversation is a necessary and positive next step in shaping the BAME student experience at Oxford.. 2. That this project has positive aims and seeks to implement real changes to improve the experience of BAME students in relation to the issues outlined above.

Council Resolves: 1. To establish ‘Walk in my shoes: The Oxford BAME Experience’ as an SU Project (Appendix I).

Proposer: Tony Farag, St Catz Seconder: Amira Kazi, St Catz

Below the line

9. Approve the It Happens Here Campaign Constitution

Council Notes: 1. In the Student Council meeting in 3rd Week Michaelmas Term, Council approved the creation of It Happens Here as an SU Campaign. 2. All SU campaigns must have a constitution that is approved by Council before it can operate.

Council Believes: 1. The constitution is appropriate for the operation of It Happens Here as an SU Campaign.

Council Resolves: 1. To approve the It Happens Here Constitution (Appendix J).

Proposer: Clara Riedl-Riedenstein, Lincoln College Seconder: Amber Sparks, Oxford SU

10. Renew the Living Wage Campaign Project

Council Notes: 1. The Living Wage Campaign Project was established by Student Council in 5th Week Michaelmas Term 2019. 2. They have submitted a report on their activities for the last term and set targets for the upcoming term (Appendix K). 3. The targets they have set would require spending of £35 beyond their funding allowance.

Council Believes: 1. The Project has set appropriate targets for the upcoming term.

Council Resolves: 1. To approve the Project Report and allocate £35 from the Project bid pot.

Proposer: Matthias Barker, St Anne’s College Seconder: Martin Babicka, Wadham College

i. Items for discussion

j. Any other business