Log in

Download minutes

Agenda

Date of Meeting:

28th October 2025 6pm - 8pm

Location:

HB Allen Centre (near Keble)

Chair:

Shermar Pryce (President for Community & Common Rooms)

Deputy Chairs:

MCR Deputy Chair - Rhys Inward

Agenda

Item A

Introduction:

  • Introduction of Sabbatical & Student Trustees in attendance
  • Explanation of the Conference of Common Rooms
  • Parameters of Conference trial & review process including KPIs
  • Reminder of key processes including submitting a motion and voting mechanisms
  • Minutes of the last meeting
  • Q&A

Item B

Governance Matters:

  • Election of Postholder (JCR Deputy Co-Chair)
    • Nominations & vote in-person

Item C

Matters Arising

  • Officer Updates
  • Officer Action Log

Item D

College Disparities Monitor

Proposed by: Shermar Pryce, President for Communities and Common Rooms; Seun Sowunmi, SU President for Undergraduates; Wantoe Wantoe, SU President for Postgraduates; Alisa Brown, SU President for Welfare, Equity & Inclusion

Decision Type: Conference Mandate

Amended by: Jess Ryan-Smith, Lincoln MCR

Presented by: Shermar Pryce

Proposal

Conference Notes:

  • The SU previously supported a transparency initiative highlighting disparities between colleges in key areas such as accommodation, welfare provision, and student costs.
  • That tool was discontinued following the departure of the former SU President, leaving a gap in comparative information for students and Common Rooms.
  • Comparable data remains essential for Common Rooms negotiating locally, within their colleges, and for students seeking clarity about living costs and support.
  • CCR provides the appropriate representative forum to coordinate this work across the collegiate University.

Conference Believes:

  • Transparency across colleges promotes fairness, accountability, and informed student choice.
  • Disparities in cost and provision directly affect equality of experience across the University.
  • A public, accurate, and regularly updated College Disparities Monitor would empower Common Rooms and strengthen evidence-based representation.
  • Collaboration with RepComs and Equity Officers will ensure the project remains inclusive, equitable, and accessible.

Conference Resolves:

  • To mandate Oxford SU to restart and maintain a public College Disparities Monitor under the stewardship of the President for Communities and Common Rooms, working within budgets approved by the Trustee Board and subject to standard risk assessment.
  • To establish a College Disparities Working Group responsible for setting up, maintaining, and verifying the Monitor.
    • Chair: President for Communities and Common Rooms
    • Voting members: two representatives from JCR PresCom and two from MCR PresCom, together with the Chair
    • Non-voting members: other Sabbatical Officers sit ex officio as non-voting members; SU staff may attend to advise on governance, data protection, and web delivery
    • Quorum: three voting members, including at least one JCR and one MCR representative
    • Meetings: at least once per term
  • To ensure the Monitor includes neutral, comparable data across key areas such as accommodation, welfare provision, bursary and hardship schemes, meal and catering costs, and access-related participation indicators.
  • To require the Working Group to:
    • Publish its methodology, change log, and participation status page on the SU website;
    • Consult RepComs and Equity Officers;
    • Maintain and update an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA);
    • Comply fully with data protection law and the SU’s privacy framework, collecting no personal data.
    • Adhere to best practices around the interpretation of data and design of the report to reduce the risk of misinterpretation or misrepresentation, and to maximise information accessibility for all students.
    • Verify the accuracy of data and figures included in the report with each College's Common Room Representatives and/or Heads of House, prior to publication.
  • To receive termly progress reports at CCR, with an annual summary in Trinity Term. Reports for noting may be listed below the line unless discussion is requested.
  • To confirm that this mandate concerns matters affecting students as students and will not be progressed beyond that scope.
  • To include a sunset clause, ending the mandate in Trinity Term 2028 unless renewed, with a review paper to be presented to CCR in Hilary Term 2028 outlining options to continue, mainstream, or close the project.

Item E

Fair Student Finance and Maintenance Reform

Proposed by: Shermar Pryce, President for Communities and Common Rooms; Seun Sowunmi, SU President for Undergraduates; Wantoe Wantoe, SU President for Postgraduates; Alisa Brown, SU President for Welfare, Equity & Inclusion

Amended by: 

Decision Type: Conference Policy

Presented by: Wantoe T. Wantoe

Proposal

Conference Notes:

  • HM Treasury opened a call for submissions ahead of the 2025 Budget, including a proposed 6% International Student Levy.
  • Oxford SU submitted a representation opposing the levy and calling for fairer, evidence-based reforms to maintenance loans and grants.
  • The SU’s Hidden Costs of Study research evidences an average shortfall of £3,000–£4,000 per year between maintenance loans and real student living costs.
  • The lower household income threshold for full maintenance loan support (£25,000) has been frozen since 2008, producing a “middle-income trap.”
  • Disabled students, carers, and parents face additional monthly costs of up to £1,000 not covered by existing allowances.

Conference Believes:

  • Every student should have access to sufficient financial support to meet basic living costs while studying.
  • Maintenance loans and grants should be indexed to real living costs and reflect high-cost areas such as Oxford.
  • The reintroduction of publicly funded maintenance grants would improve access, retention, and equity.
  • International student fees should not be used to cross-subsidise domestic student support through a levy.
  • Oxford SU’s positions on student finance should be formally adopted to guide representation and lobbying work.

Conference Resolves:

  • To adopt Oxford SU’s Budget 2025 Submission as official Conference Policy until the end of Hilary Term 2026.
  • To affirm the following positions as the policy of Oxford SU:
    • Oppose any international student levy used to fund domestic student support;
    • Support the reintroduction of maintenance grants funded publicly;
    • Advocate for regional uplifts to maintenance loans in high-cost areas;
    • Support a cost-of-living supplement for disabled students and carers.
  • To instruct Sabbatical Officers to continue to lobby HM Treasury, the University, and the Office for Students in line with these positions.
  • To publish a summary of Oxford SU’s national finance policy stance on the Policy & Insights section of the website.

Item F

National Hardship and Travel Support

Proposed by: Shermar Pryce, President for Communities and Common Rooms; Seun Sowunmi, SU President for Undergraduates; Wantoe Wantoe, SU President for Postgraduates; Alisa Brown, SU President for Welfare, Equity & Inclusion

Decision Type: Conference Mandate

Presented By: Seun Sowunmi

Proposal

Conference Notes:

  • Applications to Oxford’s central and college hardship funds have increased by 48% since 2022, with most now oversubscribed.
  • Students from care-experienced, estranged, and disabled backgrounds are at greater risk of financial precarity.
  • The Hidden Costs of Study dataset and NUS Cost of Living Survey (2023) show that 20% of students miss classes due to unaffordable travel.
  • Oxford’s geography and housing market require many students to live outside the city centre, increasing average monthly travel costs to £60–£90.

Conference Believes:

  • No student should have to choose between food, travel, and education.
  • Reliable hardship funding and affordable transport are essential to participation and inclusion.
  • A coordinated national approach is needed to prevent postcode-based inequalities in student welfare.

Conference Resolves:

  • To mandate the Sabbatical Officers to:
    • Campaign nationally for the creation of a National Student Hardship Fund, ringfenced for direct student grants;
    • Work with Oxford Brookes SU, local authorities, and transport providers to advocate for free bus travel for under-22s and a universal student railcard with no age limit to account for mature students;
    • Encourage colleges to strengthen local hardship provision for food and housing support.
  • To collaborate with the NUS and Russell Group Students’ Unions (RGSU) to advocate for sector-wide hardship and travel reform.
  • To report progress on these campaigns to CCR at the first meeting of Trinity Term 2026.

Item G

Opposition to the International Student Levy

Proposed by: Shermar Pryce, President for Communities and Common Rooms; Seun Sowunmi, SU President for Undergraduates; Wantoe Wantoe, SU President for Postgraduates; Alisa Brown, SU President for Welfare, Equity & Inclusion

Decision Type: Conference Policy

Presented By: Seun Sowunmi

Proposal

Conference Notes:

  • The UK Government has proposed a 6% levy on international student fees to fund maintenance grants.
  • Oxford SU’s 2025 Budget submission projects this levy would reduce international enrolment by 16,000 students and remove over £600 million in annual university income.
  • International student fees currently cross-subsidise UK research and teaching, and any reduction would threaten institutional stability.

Conference Believes:

  • The levy would damage research-intensive universities, international diversity, and higher education quality.
  • Student finance reform must be publicly funded, not financed through levies on international students.
  • Oxford SU should stand in solidarity with other universities in opposing this proposal and promoting a fairer, sustainable model of higher education funding.

Conference Resolves:

  • To adopt a formal policy opposing any International Student Levy, as set out in Oxford SU’s Budget 2025 submission.
  • To communicate this stance publicly and to partner with RGSU, NUS, and UUK in joint advocacy efforts.
  • To reaffirm Oxford SU’s commitment to equitable and sustainable funding for both domestic and international students.

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 H

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.

Item I

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.

Item J

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

Item K

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.

In this section