|
Date of Meeting:
|
10 June 2025 6pm - 8pm
|
|
Location:
|
HB Allen Centre (near Keble)
|
|
Chair:
|
Eleanor Miller (VP Undergraduates)
|
|
Deputy Chairs:
|
Adam Daniel (JCR President - Keble)
Rhys Inward (MCR President - Jesus)
|
| Agenda |
|
Item A
|
Introduction:
|
|
Item B
|
Governance Matters:
- Annual General Meeting
- Trustees Report
- Accounts
- Receiving list of affiliations of the union, and noting donations
- NUS Charity Membership - £4168
- NUS UK Membership - £16,670
- Advice UK Membership - £1200
- Questions to the trustees
Please submit questions in advance of the AGM regarding these items to studentengagement@oxfordsu.ox.ac.uk
- Trustee Recruitment Update (KV)
|
| Item C |
Bye-Law Updates:
|
| Item D |
|
| Item E |
Matters Arising
|
| Items for Discussion |
|
|
|
Item F
|
Common Room Election Platform
Proposed by: Nick Lang (Keble JCR Secretary)
Seconded by: Keble JCR
Decision Type: Mandate
Presented by: Nick Lang
Proposal Summary: This motion mandates the SU to improve its common room election platform by enabling returning officers to access and publish results automatically without manual SU intervention, and to implement automatic vote counting systems.
Full Motion: The SU provides an election platform to common rooms. The platform has many advantages, including integration with University SSOs and direct technical support from the SU. However, it has several major issues.
The platform is slow and unintuitive. It can be challenging to set up elections correctly, and this increases the friction in handovers between returning officers. Instructions are hard to find or are missing entirely.
The most significant issue is that returning officers cannot access the results of an election without manual intervention from the SU. Currently, when voting for an election ends, returning officers must write to the SU and request the results be manually counted. This often causes significant delays in getting results, particularly when elections finish outside working hours or days.
STV and other common voting methods are simple to implement algorithmically. It should not be necessary for a person to count the votes.
This motion mandates the SU to direct resources towards improving the election platform it provides to common rooms. It should at a minimum be made possible for returning officers to view and publish results without SU intervention, implementing a system that counts votes automatically. If this not possible with the current platform and/or software provider, the SU should consider switching the provider, or the SU should create a new platform for students where this is possible.
Tutorials on how to use the platform should be updated or created if necessary and made more easily accessible to returning officers.
Result: TBC
|
|
Item G
|
Fee Model Consideration
Proposed by: Nick Lang (Keble JCR Secretary)
Seconded by: Keble JCR
Decision Type: Mandate
Presented by: Nick Lang
Proposal Summary: This motion mandates that the Students' Union should evaluate different fee models for international students, comparing Cambridge's fixed-at-entry approach with a capped annual increase model (limited to CPI or 4% annually), and advocate for whichever provides better student value. The SU should gather evidence on fee differences between Oxford and Cambridge, consult students, and negotiate the preferred structure with the University.
Full Motion: The SU should consider carefully to what extent a fixed-at-entry, Cambridge-style fee model is likely to lead to higher fees overall. An alternative model, whereby annual increases to fees for on-course international students are capped at the lower of CPI and 4 per cent, should also be considered. The SU should consider a wide array of evidence, including differences in fees between Oxford and Cambridge. The SU should then select the model that provides the best value to students and seek to negotiate a switch to that structure with the University. If timelines allow, the SU should continue to consult students through CCR, RepComs, and other channels, before a final decision on the model is made.
Where any contradictions arise between this motion and previous motions, this motion shall supersede the relevant sections of any previous motions.
Result: TBC
|
|
Item H
|
Oxford Water Safety
Proposed by: Rory McGlade (Brasenose JCR President)
Seconded by:
Kush Vaidya, St Catherine's College JCR President
Mahima Nayak - Trinity JCR President
Catrina McNamara - Lincoln JCR President
Callum Turnbull - Balliol JCR President
Decision Type: Mandate
Presented By: Rory McGlade (Brasenose JCR President)
Motion Summary: The motion addresses concerns about water safety in Oxford, particularly during post-exam celebrations when students may engage in risky behaviors, known as Trashing. It notes that while wild swimming is popular, it carries dangers, and recent university actions have focused more on controlling Trashing than ensuring student safety.
Full Motion: Full motion text here
Result: TBC
|
|
Item I
|
EIRRS Expansion
Proposed by: Melinda Zhu (St Hilda's JCR President)
Seconded by: St Hilda's JCR
Decision Type: Mandate
Presented By: Melinda Zhu
Proposal Summary: This motion expands the existing "EIRRS Position" policy to include ending all direct and indirect investment in arms companies, arguing that restrictions on "controversial weapons" alone are insufficient since arms manufacturers cannot ensure their products comply with international law. Oxford SU will advocate for extending investment restrictions to exclude companies that derive more than 5% of revenue from armaments production, sale, or brokerage.
Full Motion: This policy expands the policy “EIRRS Position” passed in 3rd Week of TT25 to include a clear target of an end of direct and indirect investment in all arms companies.
Restrictions on “Controversial weapons” alone are insufficient, as arms manufacturers cannot ensure weapons they produce are used in line with international law.
In addition to the policy mandates outlined in “EIRRS Position”, Oxford SU and its Sabbatical Officers are mandated to advocate for the following policy change as a medium-term goal for divestment:
Expansion to all weapons. Oxford SU will push for restrictions on investments in controversial weapons to be extended to exclude direct and indirect investment in companies that make more than 5% of revenue from the production, sale, or brokerage of armaments.
Result: TBC
|
| Item J |
Keep Campsfield Closed
Proposed by: Eleanor Miller
Seconded by: Lauren Schaefer, Fahad Al-Huda
Similar motion already passed by Wadham SU, Harris Manchester JCR, and Merton JCR
Decision Type: Conference Policy
Presented By: Eloise Hainsworth, on behalf of Oxford Student Action for Refugees (STAR)
Full Motion: Support the Campaign to Keep Campsfield Closed
This SU notes that:
- The Home Office has committed to reopening Campsfield House Immigration Removal Centre
- Campsfield House Immigration Removal Centre was closed in 2018 as part of a push to reduce the number of detainees in line with a view that immigration detention should only be used as a last resort
- The final inspection before it closed found that 41% of Campfield House’s detainees felt unsafe
- Alternatives to detention have been shown to be more effective, more humane, and less expensive than immigration detention
- The UN Refugee Agency is of the view that ‘there is no evidence that detention deters irregular migration, nor encourages individuals to return home’
- The Home Office has urged officials to develop and rely on alternatives to detention when possible
- The UN Refugee Agency has stressed the need for alternatives to detention, and has found that alternatives trialled in the UK have provided good evidence for making alternatives to detention business as usual in the UK
- Both Oxford City Council and Cherwell District Council have stated their opposition to the reopening of Campsfield House
This SU believes that:
- The reopening of Campsfield House would be deeply harmful to detainees, relative to the experience they would have if an alternative to detention was used
- The reopening of Campsfield House would not help achieve the objective of cost-effectiveness
- The reopening of Campsfield House would not help achieve the objective of reduced net migration, even if we accept that the achievement of this objective would be desirable
- Given these beliefs, that Campsfield House should not be reopened, and that alternatives to detention should implemented in its place
- The Oxford Student Community should forge connections with the wider Oxford community
Result: TBC
|
Below the Line
These are items which will not be discussed and will be presumed to have been approved.
Members can request a discussion by request to the Chair. |
|
Item K
|
[this is where motions from RepComs and any motions which do not need debate/discussion will be listed for final approval for Conference]
|
|
Item L
|
Trustee Board Matters:
|
|
Item M
|
Recent consultations undertaken by the SU:
Upcoming consultations by the SU:
|
|
Item N
|
VC's Notices:
|