Conference Agendas

Date of Meeting: 

Tuesday 27th October 2026 6pm - 8pm 

Location: 

Ftizhugh Auditorium, Cohen Quad 

Chair: 

Roxana Rusu (President for Communities & Common Rooms) 

Deputy Chairs: 

JCR Deputy Chair – Isaac Gavaghan (Wadham SU) 

MCR Deputy Chair– to be elected in room 

Agenda 

Item A 

Introduction:   

• Introduction of MT W3 Conference of Common Rooms 

Item B 

Governance Matters:   

• MCR Deputy Chair election  

• Approval of CCR TT W7 Minutes 

Item C 

Matters Arising: 

• Officer Updates   

• Officer Action Log 

Items for Discussion 

Item D 

Equitable Funding for University Language Courses 

Proposed by: Magdalen JCR President (passed at Magdalen JCR meeting)  

Decision Type: Conference Mandate  

Presented by: Magdalen JCR President  

Proposal: 

This motion is to mandate the Oxford SU sabbatical officers to lobby departmental divisions in the University of Oxford to provide at least 50% funding towards university supplementary language courses as a minimum, while advocating for additional college funding. The motion has the aim of ensuring fair equitable funding for language education across the university, reducing college divides in access to education and outcomes. Currently, each department makes its own decisions about which scenarios to offer students language funding, if it all. Funding from colleges is similarly unpredictable.  

Which of the following aims does your motion or proposal hope to achieve? 

• Provide student-led direction for the Students’ Union work 

• Increase access to university supplementary language courses by improving funding and creating consistency across departments 

Conference Notes: 

• Language learning is a vital supplement to main degrees, and instrumental for many students to secure employment outside of the UK. 
   

• In an increasingly global world, language skills are valuable, and reduce reliance on sometimes inaccurate online translation services. The standard intensity courses are currently £136 per term, which is above the budget for many students. 
   

• In a survey of Magdalen JCR students (32 respondents), 62.5% selected the option 'course fees too expensive' in regards to taking an Oxford University Language Centre course, while only 15.6% of Magdalen respondents have actually attended a course for at least a term. 
   

• When the survey was expanded to students from other JCRs, 57.4% of 61 total respondents (of which at least 32 were the original Magdalen students) selected that 'course fees too expensive', while only 18% attended a course for at least a term - survey data ended 12/10/2026. 
   

• 26 students left anonymous comments, where many remarked that they were unsure if their college would fund, or that various faculties wouldn't fund their courses. 
   

• In general, funding is insufficient and confusing - with many students having to self-finance their courses or attempt to navigate confusing college systems. 
   

• Self-funding widens the outcome gap between students of different socioeconomic backgrounds, where monolingualism could restrict later job opportunities abroad. 

Conference Believes:   

• This SU should understand that university is an essential place for learning skills outside of our main degree. 

• Students shouldn't be restricted by their own finances when considering language courses. 

• Supplementary language courses can be required for certain internships/placements. 

• Funding should be equitable across departments and colleges, and should always represent at least 50% of the course fees. 

Conference Resolves:   

• To mandate the SU to lobby all departments to provide at least 50% of language course funding, regardless of reason to undertake the language course 

• To encourage colleges to supplement the remaining 50% deficit; 

• And support common rooms in doing so. 

• Consider addressing the Language Centre Committee to the cost of the supplementary language courses. 

• Report to the Conference of Common Rooms by no later than Week 3, Hilary Term 2027 on progress and findings. 

Equality Impact Assessment:  

• Stated as net positive impact for all listed demographics 

• Increased and equitable funding will benefit all students at this university with an interest in learning a language, particularly those at colleges with less funding available. 

Item E 

Staff on Student Sexual Harassment & Misconduct 

Proposed by: Magdalen JCR President (passed at Magdalen JCR general meeting)  

Seconded by:  

1. Brasenose JCR President 

2. Lincoln JCR President 

3. Pembroke JCR President 

4. St Anne’s JCR President 

Decision Type: Conference Mandate 

Proposal:  

• This motion calls on Oxford SU to support mandating policy change in relation to employed staff accused of staff on student sexual misconduct. 

Which of the following aims does your motion or proposal hope to achieve? 

• Provide the views of students and a position deemed to be representative of wider students at the University of Oxford 

• Provide student-led direction for the Students’ Union work 

Conference Notes:   

• Staff on student sexual harassment and misconduct creates an unsafe environment for students on campuses across the UK and worldwide. Cases are under-reported and data relating to the numbers of staff on student sexual misconduct cases is not consistently gathered by institutions or government, meaning that tracking the numbers of cases across the UK is not possible, creating a lack of information and accountability. 
   

• Within the University of Oxford and its colleges, there have been concerns that university employment practice is also facilitating a lack of accountability. Specifically - that staff are being hired without appropriate checks on their own history of sexual misconduct, that staff are being allowed to resign out of investigations or even after serious upheld complaints, and that even when these processes have occurred, information is being withheld including with confidentiality clauses - as part of settlement agreements and as requests for Anonymity Orders to local courts.  
   

• Stories this year published about Oxford include: 
   

• An academic who left his university position after multiple complaints of sexual harassment was allowed to continue in his college role for a further 6 years until the story was revealed by the press [Source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2025-11-28/oxford-fellow-steps-down-from-roles-following-misconduct-claims] 
   

• That Oxford reportedly ‘withheld information about sexual harassment’ of this academic to both his college and to three academic bodies who submitted a joint letter asking whether it was safe to invite the professor to attend conferences given reports that he had “abused his position of power in harassing students”. [Source: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/oxford-university-sexual-harassment-allegations-trvwcsh2q. Further evidence of professional bodies seeking and not being given information on whether he was safe to invite can be found https://www.easp.eu/getmedia.php/_media/_archive/20251202113925.html] 
   

• Another academic was hired after having already resigned following sexual misconduct at a different university. That academic then had three complaints of sexual harassment at Oxford upheld - and was allowed to resign again. [source: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2025-11-19/oxford-university-has-failed-women-over-harassment-concerns-staff-say] 
   

• An Anonymity Order (a court ordered NDA) was requested by the University in relation to a survivor who had been harassed by two academics that stopped her speaking about her own situation - and only later withdrawn after press and survivors made complaints. [source: https://www.thetimes.com/uk/education/article/oxford-university-anonymity-tribunal-xzmg9k03s] 
   

• Whilst Oxford as a University has committed to not using NDAs “to prevent the investigation of complaints of sexual misconduct or to prevent responsible whistleblowing” in practice both it and its constituent colleges may be signing settlement agreements that include confidentiality clauses with academics where complaints have been made and even upheld against them. It is on record as having requested a court placed anonymity order on a survivor. 
   

• E6 of the Office for Students Conditions of Registration require HE institutions to not put NDAs on students to restrict their ability to discuss their experience of sexual harassment - however there is a loophole that falls outside the letter (but not the spirit) of the rule for a College or University to sign an NDA with a perpetrator which prevents public disclosure of the incident therefore again evading accountability. 
   

• IHH has been collaborating with Love & Power, a nation-wide organisation, to address these longstanding issues with the input from and support of professional legal advisors. The campaign has produced a pledge which encourages the following change: 
   

• The university completes investigations concerning serious complaints of discrimination and harassment regarding sexual violence regardless of whether the accused resigns; 
   

• Faculty and college employers follow the practice of UK government backed aid agencies to not sign silencing protective settlements for those who have had complaints of sexual violence made against them and have either resigned instead of facing a process or had those complaints upheld 
   

• All final job candidates are required to declare any adverse findings in harassment proceedings and disclose whether they have been any opened against them in the past ten years that either had adverse findings or were not completed; 
   

• Survivor-victims are not silenced by use of anonymity orders, which keep the name of the accused concealed 

Conference Believes:   

• That the Aid Sector had a similar issue of sexual predators being recycled in and out of different organisations resulting publicly in the Oxfam scandal around Haiti. The solution provides a model for us - the FCDO backed Misconduct Disclosure Scheme, where over 380 organisations have signed up to share information about sexual misconduct, resulting in over 220,000 checks and 677 applications being rejected at recruitment stage. [source: https://misconduct-disclosure-scheme.org/]  
   

• That institutions' obligations were increased in October 2024 through The Worker Protection (Amendment of Equality Act 2010) 2023 - which introduced a mandatory legal duty for UK employers to proactively take reasonable steps to prevent sexual harassment in the workplace, and puts an obligation on employers to prevent recurrence. 
   

• That all students have the right to feel safe from harassment and sexual violence 
   

• That the culture and processes outlined above creates an environment free from accountability, where perpetrators are enabled to move between contracts within the Oxford context and further afield without being held fully accountable for their actions 
   

• Oxford is particularly susceptible to this situation because of the relationship between the colleges and the university, where college autonomy allows for separately contracted services between the University and the Colleges. 
   

• That it is therefore important for both common rooms and the students' union to take a united stand against sexual violence across the whole University context 
   

• That by applying a consistent policy and approach across the colleges and the University, perpetrators will no longer be able to move between contracts, or into the wider education sector as a result of these oversights 
   

• The university policy should maintain a strict policy with matters of sexual violence and harassment to hold professors, staff and employees accountable. 

Conference Resolves:   

• The SU will sign the pledge as a supporter 

• This SU will lobby the university to sign the pledge and enact the policies and procedures therein 

Equality Impact Assessment:  

• Stated as net positive impact for all listed demographics 

• Any student can be vulnerable, a safer university is better for all 

Item F 

Oxford SU 15-minute sessions on:   

1. Articles of Association proposed updates (Zagham, SU President for Undergraduates) 

2. NUS Referendum Timeline (Zagham, SU President for Undergraduates) 

3. Common Room Support Working Group KPI polling (Oxford SU Common Room Support Coordinator) 

4. Appoint CCR representative to sit on Oxford SU Nominations Committee for new external trustee (Roxi, President for Communities and Common Rooms) 

5. Strategic Plan Update (Oxford SU CEO) 

Below the Line   
These are items which will not be discussed unless requested.   
Members can request a discussion by request to the Chair (supresidentccr@oxfordsu.ox.ac.uk).   

The following motions did not pass at the previous Conference of Common Rooms due to not meeting quoracy. They will be submitted for CCR vote again without debate unless requested.  If we do not meet quoracy a second time, the motions will be deemed to have fallen. 

Item G 

No motions below the line.   

AOB:  

• Date of next meeting 

• CCR Welcome Reception, 27th October, 20:00-21:30