Something about me

How-Do.co.uk wrote something about me.

My quote doesn't make sense. But hey, they make out like i'm a hero.

United kiosk worker sacked for wearing green and gold scarf at Old Trafford

A student working part-time in an Old Trafford catering kiosk has become the latest individual connected with Manchester United to claim he has felt the strength of the club's backlash against protests targeting the Glazers.

Jerry Vyse, a first-year anthropology student at Manchester University, said he bought a green and gold scarf outside the ground and wore it during his half-time shift at last week's Champions League match against Milan only to be sacked when he refused to remove it.

He said that supporters stocking up on half-time pies and Bovril cheered his stance and booed when his supervisor put the queue on hold and asked him to leave the kiosk, marching him to the office of the catering manager.

"I turned to the supervisor and asked him why I could not continue doing my job," Vyse told Student Direct, the Manchester University newspaper and website. "He said it was not because I was wearing a scarf because, if it had been a different colour, he would not have minded.

"MUFC will no doubt state that the decision was based on uniform policy – what he told me surely refutes that. He said it was because it was 'anti-Glazer'. Does it not sniff a little bit like a dictatorship if not even the smallest of dissents can be made about an incredibly rich man who has more or less taken over the club?"

The Champions League tie was largely seen as a triumph for the protesters targeting the Glazers and supporting a potential takeover bid from the self-styled Red Knights, with David Beckham donning a green and gold scarf as he left the pitch following loud protests during the game.

In an attempt to quell the dissent United have banned players from discussing the campaign, forbidden the inhouse TV channel MUTV from mentioning it and sacked a steward after 19 years' service for attempting to return an anti-Glazer banner to its owners.

A spokesman for United said that Vyse did not comply with the club's uniform policy and refused to remove the scarf when asked.

United's chief executive, David Gill, today again defended the club's business model as he unveiled its latest overseas sponsorship deal, with Turkish Airlines. "People presuppose we have financial problems," he said. "We do not believe that is the correct situation. We are very comfortable and we have a sensible business strategy that will continue for many years to come." The Glazers have hugely increased the club's commercial revenues and plan to agressively target further expansion in overseas markets."We have 333 million followers and yesterday we celebrated 100 years at this great stadium," said Gill.

"Our history and heritage means we can bring a lot to the table. There is also a professionalism about us, so, whilst we are in an economic downturn, there are still many successful companies in the world who are investing in the future. We are one of the quality partners big entities can still associate with."

Original article in The Guardian and The Irish Times

United worker sacked for wearing anti-Glazer scarf

A Manchester United worker was sacked for wearing an anti-Glazer green and gold scarf – on the night David Beckham put one on.

Jerry Vyse, 21, from Fallowfield, worked in a food and drink kiosk at Old Trafford and decided to show his support for the anti-Glazer movement.

On the same night, last Wednesday, AC Milan player and former United hero Beckham donned a similar scarf following their Champions League match.

But the first year anthropology student, who bought his scarf outside the ground before the AC Milan match, ended up losing his job after refusing to remove it when ordered to do so by a supervisor.

Jerry said: “I bought the scarf outside of the stadium. I told the vendor I would be wearing it to work at Old Trafford for my shift for that evening’s game against AC Milan. He warned me that some staff were sacked on the spot for doing that.”

The Manchester University student put on the scarf at half-time, as many of the fans came to buy snacks and drinks.

Cheered

He says he was cheered by other fans wearing the same colours, which were originally worn by Newton Heath before they became United.

The colours are now at the forefront of the Glazer movement which has grown in recent months as United fans have seen their once debt-free club plunged into £700m worth of debt.

Jerry added: “The supervisor came round and ordered me to remove it.

“This was met with jeers from the United supporters, most of whom had the scarf on themselves.

“When I refused, the supporters cheered. He was then booed when he put the queue on hold to enter the kiosk and request I leave with him because my scarf was ‘anti-Glazer’.

A spokesman for United said: “There is a strict uniform policy and he refused to abide by it and was therefore asked to leave.”

Beckham later claimed he didn’t know the scarf – which he picked up from the pitch – was connected with the protest.

Original article in the Manchester Evening News

Bare-arsed, red-faced and raising money

“I feel like we’re all preparing to die”, said Catherine Sargent, Student Direct’s Lifestyle Editor.

You wouldn’t know it, but Catherine had convinced me only a few days earlier to be photographed nude for the Manchester RAG charity calendar. 12 societies will represent 12 months of the year, all in their birthday suits. I never really thought of the implications when I foolishly said ‘yes’.

Jennie Agg, Editor of Student Direct, asked my fellow news editor, Girish Gupta, if he wanted to make an appearance in the calendar. “I will if Adam will,” said Girish with a glint in his eye.
I arrived at the Union Bar at 1pm and sat down at a table with the other writers foolish enough to agree to this. The others try and make small talk, but there is nothing to say. Only gallows humour breaks the silence: All I can think to say is, “First guy to get an erection is buying a round of beers.” Who knew that removing clothes in front of each other could reduce a group of intelligent journalists to nervous, giggling wrecks?

I approached the bar with Catherine and Arts Editor Christina Gregory. Catherine asks me a question that I do not have an answer to, so I ask the barmaid: “Which alcohol will bloat her least?” The barmaid stares at me, bemused.

Hattie Pearson, Lifestyle writer, arrives late and looks terrified. “They only have small glasses of wine. I was considering getting the whole bottle…but I think I’ll just down this and get another one.”

My own fear was difficult to overcome. I’m not too proud of my body. I’m not toned or tanned, and being pale and ginger doesn’t lend you to nude photography. Thankfully, none one else seemed too confident either.

George Robinson, Opinion Editor, finishes the last of his glass of Carling: “I think I’ll go for the second pint.”

Five minutes later, the news finally came. “Joe is up there waiting for us,” said Catherine.

The moment had come. My stomach dropped. We look at each other. No one wanted to move.

Joe Sheffer, the paper’s Photo Editor and RAG’s designated snapper, was in the Student Direct office with an ominous-looking camera and flash bulbs. He directs Jennie, Catherine, Christina, Girish and I to the Editor’s office. “I have plans for you guys.” The six remaining writers were going to be photographed in the main office. We closed the Editor’s door.

Hearing what was going on next door made the wait all the worse. I looked through the frosted glass of the Editor’s office and saw pixelated figures take off their clothes and become flesh-coloured. A distressed Hattie Pearson screamed from the next room, “I can’t believe I’m standing naked in the Student Direct office!”

A cheer went up when Joe has finished with them. The figures in the frosted glass changed back to normal from flesh coloured. Joe opened the door. He grins. “Are you guys ready to go?”

We positioned ourselves around the office according to Joe’s instructions: Jennie sat at her desk, topless with only a copy of Student Direct to cover her modesty. Catherine is directed to stand over Jennie’s shoulder and point at the computer screen. Christina stands at the side of the desk. Joe politely asks, “Do you fancy showing a cheeky bit of cheek, Christina?”

“Oh my god”, she said, obligingly removing her underwear. “No-one dare look at my bum.”

And then it was my turn. I pulled down my boxer shorts and felt as vulnerable as on my first day in school.

Girish and I stood by the metal cabinet in the corner, attempting to casually talk while I cover myself with the office camera. I felt awkward but strangely proud of myself.

So there I was: A budding journalist, with my bare arse pointing out onto Oxford Road from the first floor of the Union building. Joe happily snapped away. I felt like this would come back to haunt me some day.

All in the name of charity.

The naked calendar will be available all through RAG Week to buy. If your society wants to be in it, contact info@manchesterrag.com to find out more.

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

Biko Records born out of Union failings, says chair

The Union does not provide students with support for artistic endeavours, according to Biko Records organisers.

The Union’s record label celebrated its launch with a night of music and bands at Club Academy last Tuesday night, headlined by Manchester band, Dutch Uncles.

“The fact that the Union doesn’t own the amps in our own venue, and that’s why we are being charged to us them, is ridiculous. We have to pay for them,” said Alex Lynham, second year student in Modern History and Economics, and one of the Chairmen of Biko.

Lynham added: “What’s the turnover of this place? How do we not own that equipment? That equipment is in our venues. We should own this Union. If someone wants to put on University bands at one of these venues, they should be able to do it for free. They should be paying the sound engineer, the lighting engineer and the bar staff: that is it.

“All these student bands come out of Manchester. You look at Dutch Uncles, Delphic, bands that are getting big at the moment. There are tens of Manchester bands every year, every decade, redefining music. A lot of them are coming from the University.“

Jake Hartnell, member of Biko Records and head of the Film Production Society said: “We want to help Manchester students’ bands develop and record their music, and make a little money for Student Action.”

The venture is the first of its kind: a student-run and student-led record label. Members of Biko Records receive none of the profit. Instead, 75 per cent of the profit is given to the artist, and 25 per cent donated to the University of Manchester charity, Student Action. Biko digitally distribute artists to major online outlets, including Spotify, iTunes, and HMV. Before the label was even officially launched, a band distributing through Biko, Kulucci March, made it to number 55 in the download charts.

“We could make so much more if we get the ability to host gigs in the Academy venues without paying to pay outrageous amounts for the rooms,” added Hartnell.

Lynham continued: “The Union is content to say, ‘The city will cater for them.’ Well, the city is pretty crap to students and pretty crap to young bands. So why aren’t students supporting students?”

“The Union is geared to being a business, rather than looking towards the people it is supposed to support. It’s not being done properly.”

He added, “There is a city full of venues out there, but they prefer us to use Union venues because we are a Union society. And because the funding system for societies is broken, we can’t get the money up front unless we really have them on side to do that. Even if we do, they say ‘You have to do it at the Union.’ They can’t have it both ways.”

“A good portion of the cost of the launch night was just the venue. They take it out of what we make for the night. If we don’t make enough, I guess they have to write it off.

“It’s part of a wider movement of reclaiming the Union in general. People are beginning to realise that students aren’t involved in their Union. Something clearly must be broken for that to have occurred. The students are beginning to stand up and say ‘Here’s what’s wrong’.

“It’s stuff that people often right of as irrelevant or a minor issue. It’s a symptom of a wider problem, which is non-participation. Students have this reputation of being lazy and rubbish. We are not lazy and we are not rubbish.”

Andy Proudfoot, drummer of Dutch Uncles and University of Salford student said, “I was talking to my dad, and he said that when he was a student, universities would be the first port of call for small touring bands. No other venues were available. The Union was so much more involved with bands touring. And it’s nice to see a label bring the music industry back to students unions and universities.”

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

Cold Souls

“Flat out funny” covers Paul Giamatti’s forehead on the advertisement for Cold Souls. The title would suggest otherwise. Cold Souls is not flat out funny. Much like Chekhov’s Uncle Vanya, the play that the central character struggles with so much, it is a tragic comedy. Even more so, it is a clash of surrealist comedy and existential drama.

First-time writer and Director, Sophie Barthes, said that she came upon the idea in a dream. In the dream, Woody Allen had his soul extracted and was infuriated to find that it looked like a chickpea. Barthes took this idea and made it the best running joke in the film.

Cold Souls centres on Paul Giamatti, playing himself. Tormented by his new role in Uncle Vanya, he struggles to separate himself from the bitter character that he plays. He seeks refuge in a new service called Soul Storage. The soul can be disembodied, stored, and replaced with other souls: if one so desired. David Strathairn, who played Edward R. Murrow in Good Night & Good Luck with such style, plays Dr. Flintstein (read: Frankenstein – another Doctor who attempts to tamper with nature), the inventor of this new technology. Strathairn’s deadpan lines are perfectly weighted, “soullessness does have its peculiarities” being particularly dry.

Giamatti initially finds life easier without his troubled soul, but his performance of Uncle Vanya only deteriorates. He finds life without a soul empty and meaningless. His wife (an understated and convincing Emily Watson) begins to notice the change. He returns to the clinic for a replacement soul and then finally, he wants his own.

The latter half of the film concerns the Giamatti’s pursuit of the Russian importers of souls. The traffickers use “mules” that transport and, in Giamatti’s case, steal souls. Giamatti’s search for the physical soul leads him to St. Petersburg. There are parallels with drug trafficking and the Russian sex industry. This idea could have been explored much more deeply and effectively. But the film’s need to be kooky seems to override any social or political comment.

Giamatti’s role is pivotal. So much of the film is seen through his eyes. The film could only work if his performance is authentic: and it is. He is subtle and bittersweet in this world-weary manifestation of himself. Without him, the film would cease to be slow-paced and meandering, and simply be boring. But it cannot quite tie the film together.

The moments of warmth between Giamatti and his wife are beautifully subtle. Contrast this with the camera work: a bitterly grey New York and a bleak St. Petersburg. Andrij Parekh’s cinematography is strong and constructs both locations as Giamatti’s personal purgatory. The human moments are the only parts that do not bite with the anguish of an empty soul. But the interactions with his wife are far too infrequent. As the film progresses, it becomes clear that the most engaging part of the film has passed the viewer by. The shift between existential drama and mystery romance towards the end of the film is particularly difficult to swallow.

Easy comparisons are drawn to Charlie Kaufman’s films, particularly Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and Being John Malkovich. Like Being John Malkovich, the central character is a fictionalised version of himself. Like Eternal Sunshine, a new technology can remove physically remove one’s emotional problems. Much like Kaufman’s most recent film, Synecdoche, New York, Cold Souls is influenced by Jungian psychology, particularly Giamatti’s self-realization on seeing his own soul. But it lacks the flair of Kaufman & Michel Gondry’s Eternal Sunshine. And it does not have the intellectual strength of Being John Malkovich.

There is a sense that this film is trying desperately to be a cult film, and that it would have been better realised if Kaufmann had made this film himself. It could potentially have been excellent – Giamatti’s talents seem to be under the radar of most cinemagoers, if not award committees.

Verdict – Cold Souls shows so much promise and yet, ultimately, it is a little disappointing. Much like seeing your soul and finding it looks like a chickpea.

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

Manchester United employee sacked after wearing anti-Glazer scarf

An employee of Manchester United Football Club (MUFC) and University of Manchester student was fired after wearing a green and gold scarf last Wednesday night.

The scarf is a protest against the current owners of Manchester United, the Glazer family. Many fans wear the colours of Newton Heath, the club’s former incarnation, as an act of dissent against the Glazers. The movement has grown in recent months as Manchester United fans have seen their formerly debt-free club plunged into £700m pounds worth of debt.

Jerry Vyse, a first year Anthropology student, worked in one of the many food and drink kiosks at Old Trafford. He purchased a green and gold scarf before the game against AC Milan on Wednesday night. Vyse said: “I bought the scarf for five pounds off one of the countless sellers stocking them around the outside of the stadium. I told him I would be wearing it to work at Old Trafford for my shift selling pies and Bovril for that evening’s game against AC Milan. He wished me the best of luck, but warned me that some staff were sacked on the spot for doing that.

“I put it on at half-time as the floods of people poured out to stock themselves up with fluids and solids. The fans started to cheer in solidarity.

“Hearing the commotion, the supervisor came round and ordered me to remove it. This was met with jeers from the united supporters, most of whom had the scarf on themselves.”

Vyse continued: “When I refused, the supporters cheered, before shouting comments at the supervisor to let me get on with my job because the scarf does not effect my ability to work a till. He was then booed when he put the queue on hold to enter the kiosk and request I leave with him because my scarf was ‘anti-Glazer’.

“I turned to the supervisor and asked him why I could not continue doing my job. He said it was not because I was wearing a scarf, because if it had been a different colour he would not have minded. MUFC will no doubt state that the decision was based on uniform policy – what he told me surely refutes that. He said it was because it was ‘anti-Glazer’. Does it not sniff a little bit like a dictatorship if not even the smallest of dissents can be made about an incredibly rich man who has more or less taken over the club?

Vyse alleges that public catering manager, David Moses, attempted to intimidate him into removing the scarf. Vyse said, “He told me to ‘take that smug grin off your face or I’m going to get very angry’. He then marched me to the Head Office of Catering.”

“He asked me, furiously, ‘Who pays your wages? Is it not Glazer?’ I answered ‘No, it’s the fans. Without them this club would not exist’. I then asked him the question: ‘Who pays Glazers wages then. Is it not the fans?’”

Student Direct contacted David Moses for further comment. When asked if Vyse was fired because of his green and gold scarf, Moses said, “Not at all. I’ve got no further comment”, and hung up the phone.

A spokesperson from the club said: “There is a strict uniform policy and he refused to abide by it and was therefore asked to leave.”

David Beckham last week caused both controversy and smiles on the faces of many Manchester United fans after their game with AC Milan when he donned a similar gold and green scarf that had been thrown onto the Old Trafford pitch.

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

Hustings: A Sketch

Political rhetoric and difficult and occasionally irrelevant questioning took centre stage last Tuesday in the Union, as hustings for the student executive elections got under way.

Conversations beforehand brought up some fatalistic concerns about the elections. “Everyone knows how they are going to vote before they’ve heard a single candidate speak,” said a member of the audience.

Walking into a cold and bright Academy 2, there is a sense of déjà vu. Much like General Meetings, only a fraction of the student population are here. A sixth of the audience are standing for Executive positions themselves.

A few key issues came up time and time again; tuition fees, university cuts and liberation issues. Nearly all candidates addressed the most pressing issues: participation. Why do some students feel so disconnected from the Union? There is evidently a malaise about student politics at the University of Manchester. If a General Meeting cannot muster 300 eager decision-makers, why should elections be any different?

Hustings did provide some entertaining moments. ‘Big Z Bear’ or Zubair Asghar, a candidate for Engineering and Physical Sciences Faculty Officer, sat in the second row making his feelings clear on who he supported out of candidates. He eventually took to the hustings microphone and delivered his own speech in rhyming couplets.

Hustings was host to some impressive public speakers. You can picture these speakers, not just as winners of this year’s election, but also as politicians of national importance. Others provided little or no depth and no applicable ideas.

It was a hustings of extremes. Student elections often drag up the unusual, the unprepared and some genuinely impressive candidates. The most promising aspect of the evening was how many questions were asked to the candidates. There is legitimate passion in Manchester’s students. It has just yet to be harnessed.

The room near-emptied after two hours of hearing the sabbatical candidates. The final few struggled through the non-sabbatical officers speeches. ‘Big Z Bear’ encapsulated the feelings of the few remaining audience members: “No one dare ask a question.”

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

No more spills? BP teams up with University of Manchester

In August 2006 a pipeline running through Prudhoe Bay North Slope in Alaska bursts. Thousands of gallons of oil spill into an area of natural beauty. The cause of the spill is a lack of basic maintenance and cost cutting.

The company responsible for the pipeline are British Petroleum (BP).

The University of Manchester, along with the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), will be working in corrosion research and safety. BP has initially invested two million dollars, roughly £1.2m, into this field of research, and intends to match this figure for four more years.

“Corrosion control, mitigation, and monitoring are significant concerns in our industry,” said Simon Webster, BP’s Vice-President for the IRF flagship. “We recognised that the future success of the IRF programme depends on having reliable long-term access to highly specialised materials and corrosion expertise and laboratory facilities. Our collaboration with MIT and Manchester will provide us with the world-class research access we need.”

But the history of corrosion technology and BP is filled with neglect, environment damage and cover-ups.

Greater technological advances are required in corrosion and environmental cracking in pipelines is required as BP moves into more extreme environments with higher temperatures, deeper reservoirs and greater pressures. The two universities will be at the forefront of this research, ensuring events in such as the Alaska spill are prevented. According to National Geographic News, over 267,000 gallons (1 million litres) of oil was spilled in Alaska’s North Slope due to corrosion in a BP pipeline. The spill occurred in winter, avoiding harm to thousands of migratory birds, caribou, and other animals that inhabit North Slope in the spring and summer.

BP was chastised for the neglect that had led to the spill. Senator Ted Stevens, Republican senator from Alaska, said that BP had misled him for years over safety issues on the Alaskan pipeline. Senator Stevens added that he was “shocked” to discover that, in some portions of the pipeline, 81 per cent of the steel had been eaten away by corrosion. A 2007 US Congressional hearing said that there was a “mountain of evidence” that cost cutting on maintenance had led to the oil spill in Alaska.

A chairman of BP America admitted that “there was a concerted effort to manage costs” in the Alaskan pipeline. However, he maintained, “budget increases alone would not have prevented the leaks.”

However, the Congressional hearing did not agree. Member of the House of Representatives and Democrat John Dingell read from an internal e-mail that said budget cuts would force BP to end a programme of adding corrosion inhibitors to the pipeline. “BP staff were worried this would increase corrosion,” said Dingell.

A criminal enquiry into the spills led US Federal Investigators to a document for an engineering firm, Coffman Engineers, warning that there was evidence of “accelerated” corrosion in the BP pipeline network. The report dates back to 2004, before the eventual oil spills in Alaska, two years later. Coffman Engineers warned that the pipeline system was venerable to corrosion.

Don Stears, manager of Coffman Engineers, told The Times in 2006 that, “our reports were quite accurate as far as corrosion mechanism that BP needed to address.” Mr Stears also said, after assessing the Alaskan pipeline, BP needed to take preventative measures in corrosion over its entire network.

The report did not entirely criticise BP, but it did warn of the “accelerated” corrosion in 2004 and that BP had not run industry standard tests, such as the “smart pig” robot or “coupons,” which are flat sheets of metal inserted into the pipeline to determine corrosion.

Darren Beaudo, a spokesman for BP in 2006 told The Independent, “There is a corrosion mechanism at work here that we don’t understand. The [Coffman] reports recognise that corrosion was increasing but we have never denied that… [But] nothing I’ve seen in Coffman indicated that they pointed at specific problems in the transit lines,” Mr Beaudo said. “Coffman was generally very complimentary about our maintenance programme.”

The US federal government and the State of Alaska both filed civil case against BP after the Prudhoe Bay oil spill, maintaining that failed to adequately prepare for the spill under the Clean Water Act.

BP issued a press release on October 24, 2007, which admitted that the company “failed to meet our own standards and the requirements of the law.” The statement included an apology by BP America Chairman and President Bob Malone.

BP pleaded guilty to charges related to the Texas City refinery blast, pipeline leaks in Alaska and price fixing. They paid a record $373 million (£187 million) in fines and penalties after agreeing a peace deal with the US Department of Justice (DoJ).

In October 2009, the US Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) gave BP a further $87.4m fine, following a failure to resolve the environment and safety issues highlighted in 2007 at the Texas Oil Refinery.

When asked if the academic partnership with MIT and the University of Manchester was a result of the fines and court cases against them, a spokesperson from BP told Student Direct: Mancunion: “The operation has been in place for a long time and working out what is needed. Alaska is only part of the reason for the research, but it’s not the trigger. It is simply an example of why this sort of wider knowledge is going to be more and more important.”

“Alaska is just one of our dozens and dozens of our operations around the world. Some are even older, most are newer.

“We’ve replaced dozens and dozens of miles of pipelines, in Alaska and elsewhere, as an effort in ongoing maintenance.”

But problems with the oil giant’s pipelines will not go away. Engineers had warned BP that the already controversial Baku-Tbilisi-Cayhan, a pipeline that runs from Azerbaijan to Turkey via Georgia, did not have a sufficient quality of protective corrosive coating applied to the pipeline. An enquiry into the pipelines shows that BP ignored evidence and expert advice on the coating system. Ignoring these warnings lead to oil leakage and corrosion, according to the enquiry.

Furthermore, BP has been criticised for its actions in Turkey. According to a report by published by Kurdish Human Rights Project, The Corner House, Friends of the Earth and Environmental Defence, there has been evidence of human rights abuses, including violations of international fair trial standards in Turkey. Ferhat Kaya, a human rights activist who worked with villagers affected by the Baku-Tbilisi-Cayhan pipeline, was arrested and allegedly tortured in 2004.

Friends of the Earth International Finance Campaigner Hannah Ellis said: “BP’s project is resulting in human rights abuses on the back of development bank finance. Ferhat Kaya’s trial highlights the failure of the project’s attempts at consultation with those affected. BP and the banks involved must do more to ensure that the work they fund is not breaching fundamental environmental and social standards.”
There are further concerns over BP’s poor human rights record. In 2006, BP had a multi-million dollar settlement with a group of Colombian farmers after accusations that BP benefited from a campaign of harassment and intimidation carried about by the Colombian paramilitaries who were employed to guard a BP pipeline. It was never alleged that BP had any involvement in any of the paramilitaries’ activities.

BP’s environmental record is no cleaner. According to Greenpeace UK, in 2007 alone BP released over 63 million tonnes of CO2 into the earth’s atmosphere, roughly equivalent to the emissions of Portugal. In 2008, Greenpeace UK awarded BP the ironic “Emerald Paintbrush” award, which was given for BP spending 93 per cent ($20bn) of its investment in petroleum, despite multimillion-dollar advertising campaigns committing to alternative energy sources. The remaining seven per cent was shared between bio fuels, solar energy and wind energy, despite BP claiming to be ‘Beyond Petroleum’.

More recently, BP has been one of the many oil companies digging in the tar sands of Fort McMurray, Alberta, Canada. In August last year, protesters and members of the Cree aboriginal people campaigned against British companies involvement in the digging. BP were named as one of the major players in the scheme under chief executive Tony Hayward.

The oil companies in question dispute claims that extracting oil from the tar sands causes more pollution. Eriel Tchekwie Deranger, from Fort Chipewyan, a centre of Alberta’s tar sands schemes, disputes this, saying: “It is destroying the ancient boreal forest, spreading open-pit mining across our territories, contaminating our food and water with toxins, disrupting local wildlife and threatening our way of life.

George Poitras, a former chief of the Mikisew Cree First Nation, had further, more damaging criticisms of the work. Poitras became concerned about the unusually high rate of cancer in the locals: a largely aboriginal community 600 kilometres northeast of Edmonton. A high number of cases of cholangiocarcinoma, a rare bile duct cancer, were reported by the locals. He said: “We are seeing a terrifyingly high rate of cancer in Fort Chipewyan, where I live. We are convinced these cancers are linked to the tar sands development on our doorstep.”

It showed British companies were complicit in “the biggest environmental crime on the planet,” said Deranger.

A recent report by the Alberta Health Services confirmed some of the worst fears of the Mikisew Cree First Nationers. The report stated: that increases in numbers of three particular cancers “warrant closer monitoring of cancer occurrence in upcoming years. Whether people living in Fort Chipewyan have an increased risk of developing cancer is still not clear.”

The University of Manchester is no stranger to controversial business partners. The University worked with Shell to develop bio fuels, which could arguably compete with food production, with farmers switching from food to fuel crops. Potentially, this could drive up food prices in areas where people are already starving.

A University of Manchester spokesman said: “BP has selected the University of Manchester and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and as its academic research partners to further investigate materials and corrosion science and technology. The Corrosion and Protection Centre at the University of Manchester is home to more than 70 students and research workers and 11 academic staff, making it the largest academic-based institute of its kind.

“The University of Manchester has a long history of constructive engagement with industry. Leading research-intensive universities such as Manchester have a responsibility to engage with leading commercial organisations to address together the most pressing societal issues.”

Laura Willaims, Campaigns Officer for the University of Manchester Students’ Union said, “Considering that the University stresses the importance of social responsibility and sustainability as part of its 2015 strategy document, it concerns me that it the University maintains a strategic alliance with BP. In light of the issues surrounding BP’s environmental and ethical practices the University should seriously reconsider this alliance if it sincerely wishes to meet its objectives.”

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

Students caught on secret cameras

University halls of residencer are using secret, hidden cameras to monitor illicit or anti-social behaviour.

The cameras are used to monitor ‘hot spot’ areas, where vandalism and smoking are common. They are also set up to record any students who activate the fire alarms in non-emergencies. The Owens Park Tower has eight such cameras available to staff.

An Owens Park employee told Student Direct: Mancunion: “There are cameras that we can move. They respect all the legal requirements for privacy laws. The tutors don’t know where they are without asking specifically.”

The employee stressed that the cameras are not used in any personal spaces, such as bedrooms or bathrooms.

When asked how the cameras were disguised, the employee said: “It would be irresponsible to report that, because it would be less effective and they are there for people’s safety.

“The cameras have been successful in catching people for various things. Levels of vandalism and things like that are way down this year. They are at almost acceptable levels.”

Incidents caught on camera have included drug use and smoking in communal areas and acts of property damage.

“There haven’t been any instances where we have criminally prosecuted. That would be for very serious things. The cameras are usually for fact finding. ‘Who did this?’ or ‘who was here at this time?’ etc. We don’t need evidence in the same way a criminal court would, because we aren’t building a case.

“Most of the time, we have photographic evidence of people doing the crime itself and we have no vested interest in them doing it or being caught, so we have no reason to fake it. In fact, the university is biased against kicking people out because it would mean a loss of revenue.”

The employee also said that some of the visible cameras are intentionally not in operation. “Nowhere does it say that there will be visible CCTV. Some of the cameras are fake. ‘Security theatre’ – it’s an interesting concept.

“It’s actually a mixture. Some of the cameras are real, some fake and some invisible. It’s a lot more effective.”

A spokesperson from the University of Manchester said: “As part of our security measures to protect students, we use CCTV in all residences, and there are signs advising residents and visitors throughout the area. We have had occasion to use temporary CCTV in certain locations where we have experienced malicious fire alarm activations and tampering with fire equipment. As a result we have seen a significant 76 per cent reduction in false alarms, which have caused major inconvenience to our residents. All of our camera installations comply with the Information Commissioner’s Office code of practice.”

However, hidden cameras are by no means standard in university-owned halls of residence. A University of Salford spokesperson said that there is “absolutely no way” that hidden cameras would be used in their halls.

Another member of staff at Owens Park said: “The contract of residency pretty much allows OP staff to do whatever they like. They can come in your room without permission, use cameras in non-sensitive areas. It is all in the contract.”

Isabelle Uren, a first year Combined Studies student and resident of Owens Park said: “When I first heard about it, everyone was talking like it was a conspiracy theory. But really, I feel like it’s for the better. People have said how much of a problem fire alarms were last year. Now it only seems to go off occasionally. As long as they aren’t in the bedrooms or bathrooms, it’s fine.”

Other students were not so pleased. Anna Korenkova, a first year Business Management and Marketing student and resident of the OP Tower said: “I think that there’s a limit to where privacy should be allowed to be invaded in halls. Obviously for safety reasons it’s only wise to tighten up on security. However, people shouldn’t forget that these are hundreds of peoples’ homes and only spaces.”

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

Students clash over Israeli Ambassador visit

Palestine and Israel supporters came to blows in front of the Students’ Union last week after a controversial speaker pulled out of a Union hosted event.

Israel Deputy Ambassador Talya Lador-Fresher was scheduled to speak at a Politics Society event last Thursday, but “postponed” her appearance following a barrage of criticism and threats of a protest by Action Palestine activists, allegedly because of security concerns.

Despite the cancellation of the talk, over 100 Action Palestine protesters gathered on the Union steps in the afternoon. “The Politics Society accepted the invite of the Deputy Ambassador, who has since cancelled the visit, or at least postponed it,” said one of the organisers. “It is still important to continue with the rally to highlight that Union executives let go ahead a talk that contravenes a motion that was passed at a General Meeting that was the largest in our history with 1,200 people attending.

“Manchester has a strong history in supporting Palestine and I think there is quite an overwhelming movement in support of Palestine. We can’t let the Israeli PR Machine win, we have to stand up against this.”

Last academic year, over 1,000 students attended General Meeting to vote on the ‘Gaza Crisis’ motion in support of Palestine. A part of the policy stipulates that UMSU joins the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement that boycotts companies that support or benefit from the Israeli occupation.

The Deputy Ambassador was supposed to deliver a talk entitled ‘Hopes and Challenges in the Middle East’ hosted by the Politics Society in Academy 2. Action Palestine and other supporters strongly criticised the decision to allow the talk on Union premises in light of the declared solidarity with Palestine.

However despite the potential clash with Union policy, it is illegal to prevent a speaker from visiting the Union because of their politics. The 1986 Education Act, which governs Students’ Unions, stipulates that: “The use of premises is not denied to anyone because of their beliefs or politics.”

This conflict between the General Meeting policy and the law was a source of heated debate at an emergency Executive meeting the day before the protest and scheduled talk. At the meeting the Union Executive committee eventually agreed that allowing Lador-Fresher to speak at the Union contravenes policy, yet voted against cancelling the event.

Union General Secretary Gabriel Hassan explained the series of events leading up to the meeting, saying: “The Politics Society followed the Union procedure around visiting speakers and handed in the necessary forms on time two weeks before the event. The speaker was identified as controversial but in light of the University of Manchester’s Code of Practice on Freedom speech it was deemed that Deputy Israeli Ambassador should be allowed to speak.”

Explaining the Executive’s vote, Welfare Officer Vicky Thompson said: “This Union has a Boycott, Disinvestment and Sanctions (BDS) policy that was democratically passed by a majority of hundreds in the wake of the Gaza massacre. Being part of the BDS movement not only means there shouldn’t be Israeli products in our shop; it means that no Israeli diplomats should be speaking in our Union.

“In a vote, the majority of the Executive agreed that permitting this meeting to go ahead would be a contravention of our policy. Then several of the same Exec members didn’t have enough courage in their convictions to vote to cancel the event. They backed down, sending out the dual message that democracy doesn’t matter and that if a meeting is kept quiet long enough, it can go ahead.

“This Union is supposedly controlled by its members and General Meetings are supposed to be our supreme policy making body. When hundreds of students make a democratic decision, the task of the Union’s Executive should be to uphold that decision, not to trample all over it.”

Fellow Executive member Oliver Worth, Humanities Faculty Officer, voted against both decisions. “The Executive’s decision to consider a speech by Israel’s Deputy Ambassador to be against union policy was racist, undemocratic, and highlighted an executive willing to drastically overstep their authority,” he said.

“I voted against this decision because I don’t believe in gagging someone’s right to speak based on their nationality. Efforts to prevent this speech are orchestrated by members of Action Palestine, an organisation happy to host terrorists, yet eager to prevent someone speaking for fear of students hearing a balanced view of a conflict they like to polarise to the maximum.”

Women’s Officer Hazel Kent said considering that three out of ten Union policies are about Palestine, she felt it was “against the will of the student population to have a representative of the Israeli government speaking, though this is my interpretation.

“I abstained from voting to cancel the talk because I couldn’t decide on the ‘right’ decision. However, here are my two conflicting trains of thought. Cancel: Logically, having voted that the talk would be against Union policy, the next step would be to cancel it. Don’t cancel: Two weeks ago I would have said, “move it to the University, due to our policy this should categorically not happen on Union premises.

“But…The Politics Society followed procedure; it’s the Union’s responsibility we weren’t discussing it until the day before. The possibility that some Jewish students on campus would feel under attack, or even be under attack if this was cancelled was brought up. And it would be illegal under the Education Act to cancel it.

“I couldn’t decide between the two choices, and so I abstained. I’m unsure whether that was the right decision – but given how I felt at the time, it was the only one I felt I could make.”

A statement from the Union Executive added that in future “the procedure for visiting speakers that may contravene Union policy should be reviewed.”

The talk by the Israeli Deputy Ambassador would not have been the only controversial one in recent weeks. The Islamic Society hosted a speaker who allegedly had links to Hamas on February 13, which attracted criticism from the Jewish Society.

In an interview with Student Direct: Mancunion, Deputy Ambassador Lador-Fresher said she was very disappointed to not be able to attend the talk, where she was going to speak about the current situation in the Middle East from an Israeli perspective.

“It was decided to postpone it due to the fact that there were many security concerns regarding the event. As I’m sure you’re well aware there were a lot of organisations happening both outside and inside the hall.

“The security was not so much concerned with the protesters outside, but also with the protesters inside. And again, I have been shouted at before and it is unpleasant and inconvenient, but that was not the issue at all. There were serious concerns about physical abuse.”

She added that freedom of information, speech and discussion were the very cornerstones of academia, and that academic boycotts were leaving Israel out of “everything that academia stands for.”

“This trying to silence Israeli voices, it’s absolutely disturbing.”

Members of the Jewish society organised their own rally after the talk’s cancellation, confronting the Action Palestine protesters on the Union steps.

One Jewish Society protester said: “Being critical of Israel is one thing, but denying that the state as a whole should exist is another. You can criticize Israel without calling it illegitimate. We wanted to make the point that Union policy does not represent us. It was intimidation that meant that the speaker couldn’t come today. Action Palestine’s tactics are that they scare. It’s not OK that a speaker, welcomed by a society, couldn’t come because of intimidation.”

Jamil Keating, a 16-year-old local high school student and member of Action Palestine’s protest, was at the front as the two opposing sides converged. Each side refused to stop pushing and tension grew with some protestors from both sides forced to climb over the railings to avoid injury.

Keating said: “The Deputy Israeli Ambassador decided not to come, so we were really happy. The union here have a really good policy of speaking out against repression like they did with South Africa, and like they are [doing] with Israel and Palestine. The speaker decided not to come, so we decided to make the protest a symbolic one, rather than a tactical one, and try and represent the plight of the Palestinian people. The protest was enjoyable; there was music and chanting. And then from across the road we see a Zionist group assembling. We have people who support our protest who are Israeli, but support the Palestinian people. They called us anti-Semitic. We ignored them, but they came up the stairs. We linked arms, and we said ‘This union has taken a policy against the Israeli government since they have been proven to be war criminals.’

“But it started to get aggressive. There was pushing, I was kneed in the crotch. The police were pulling people apart. It is inevitably going to happen when you have two groups of people with opposing ideological and political ideas.”

Eventually the protesters were herded inside the Students’ Union by police and security staff, where they continued confronting each other. Protesters from both sides were standing their ground in the foyer, shouting paroles and chanting.

“They were ridiculous protests and became not about politics, but about who could shout louder,” said second year Politics and History student Dan Berkeley. “That was the problem with the lack of debate in the first place. It was just aggressive people shouting. I’ve never been able to hear their views. All I’m told is, ‘I should be ashamed’ and ‘I’m scum’ and that ‘I’m a murderer’. They don’t know my views and frankly, I don’t know theirs. They never want to sit down and speak. They never want to debate. It’s not politics.”

Patrick Cowling, a History student and member of Action Palestine’s protest added: “It got pointless towards the end. We had a rally here for solidarity to the Palestinians. The pro-Israelis came and it became who could shout who down. We are here for the Palestinians. They are here to support their apartheid racist government, who are actively pursuing a policy of ethnic cleansing.”

However, the protests also sparked genuine debate between members of the two groups. First year student Jacob Rothschild commented: “I’m not a radical person. We’re all grown up students, why not be cool with each other and let everyone speak? I don’t see the point, these people have the same right to speak as [Lador-Fresher]. There are many ways of engaging with each other.”

The Politics Society, who were to host the talk was largely sidelined during the protest. In a statement given to Student Direct: Mancunion, they said:

“The Politics Society regrets the non-attendance of the Deputy Israeli Ambassador due to heightened security risks. The Politics Society always strives to represent the broad medium of views in its capacity as a neutral vehicle of political opinion. The right to protest is something to be cherished, it is just a shame the cost is what would certainly have been an engaging and interesting event.”

The cancellation of the talk coincided with the Israeli Ambassador being summoned by the Foreign Office following the assassination of Hamas official Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai. Several suspects had been travelling with fake British passports. However, asked about links between the cancellation of the Manchester talk and Foreign Office summon, Lador-Fresher replied “absolutely not,” maintaining the reason was security.

Greater Manchester Police had a presence at the protest, but reported no incidents and no arrested were made.

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

Students willing to pay higher fees for certain degrees, says government research

University students would accept higher tuition fees for certain degrees, according to a recent government-funded report.

Research by the Institute of Employment Studies (IES) claims that “non-traditional applicants” or students from lower socio-economics backgrounds, would agree to pay more for degrees that allow access to top earning jobs, such as law and economics. However, they would be less willing to accept differential fees for certain universities, such as Oxford University charging higher fees than other higher education institutions.

Australia has already implemented such a system, where students can pay twice as much for a degree in accountancy and law, compared to a course in education or nursing.

“Applicants to HE were firmly set on the idea of studying towards a degree: in hypothetical scenarios, they were not easily dissuaded from HE by the introduction of a range of drawbacks and the prospect of fee increases,” according to the report.

The report cites the continual rise in applicants to University, despite the addition of top-up fees, as evidence that increased fees would not dissuade applicants from applying to high-profile degrees. Applications to universities has reached record levels for the fourth year in a row, with numbers up by a fifth from last year.

According to the report, “Financial factors tend not to dent HE aspirations among those planning to apply. Indeed, they tend to be outweighed by a range of non-financial factors, especially for younger people. Insofar as finance is important in decision-making, it is in determining where to apply and study rather than what to study or whether to study at all.

“This study has found that the effects of fee increases are more likely to be felt in the specifics of applicants’ HE decisions than in the overall intention to study towards a degree.”

The findings were based on interviews with nearly 200 applicants, parents, staff and students.

Kate Little, Academic Affairs Officer for the UMSU, said: “Access to the professions is already heavily weighted in favour of students from more privileged backgrounds. Charging premium fees for these courses would only serve to raise the glass ceiling for poorer families, making careers in law and medicine available only to those who can afford to study them.

“Furthermore, the assumption that all graduates in these subjects will go on to get highly paid jobs is flawed: what about legal aid lawyers, or doctors who work for charities in the developing world? It is ludicrous to suggest that because you might earn more, you must pay more: all courses should be free at the point of entry, and if you actually earn more you pay for your education through taxation. Basing up-front fees on future wage calculations is overly simplistic, and can only serve to strengthen the divide between rich and poor.”

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

Speaker’s alleged Hamas link splits students

A guest speaker accused of supporting Hamas and the destruction of Israel will feature at an event held at the University of Manchester this week. The Federation of Student Islamic Societies will host Dr. Azzam Tamimi, at the FOSIS Palestine Conference 2010.

Dr. Tamimi is the director of the Institute of Islamic Political Thought and a regular contributor to Al-Jazeera and the Guardian. Accusations of anti-Semitism have led to concerns from the Jewish community.

In an interview with BBC News 24 HARDtalk, Tamimi described sacrificing his life for Palestinian justice as “a noble cause. It is the straight way to pleasing my God and I would do it if I had the opportunity.”

The Daily Mail reacted to this quote, reporting, “A British-based Muslim radical appeared to back suicide bombing yesterday when he claimed that dying for your beliefs was ‘just’.” Dr Tamimi responded in the Guardian, stating that, “martyrdom is dying for justice and peace…not blowing oneself up killing innocent people.”

Alex Goodman, of the Manchester Jewish Society (MJS), said: “MJS is concerned about the welfare of all students on campus and seek safety for all and freedom from extremism and hate speech. We sincerely hope that this event will not be a forum for hate.”

“If anything racist or hate inciting was said, we would intervene.” said Tom Fairhurst, Communications Officer at the UMSU. “It is clearly illegal, and against our policy and we would not hesitate to intervene. But before anything is said we have to respect our values of free speech.”

Fairhurst added: “If students are concerned, we will put more security in place.”

Also speaking at the conference will be Ismail Patel, a graduate from the University of Manchester and founder of the NGO, Friends of Al-Aqsa. The organisation is concerned with human rights in Palestine. Yet, he has been accused of supporting terrorism by defending Hamas. In a demonstration on January 10, 2009, Patel said: “Hamas is no terrorist organisation. The reason they hate Hamas is because they refuse to be subjugated, occupied by the Israeli state, and we salute Hamas for standing up to Israel.”

The event takes place on February 13 at University Place and is hosted by the USMU Islamic Society.

A University of Manchester spokesperson said: “The University is fundamentally committed to ensuring freedom of speech within the law.

“This particular event has been organised by a recognised Students’ Union society and hosted by the Students’ Union, rather than the University itself. As necessary, the University seeks assurances from the student society and the Students’ Union that the event will be conducted in an orderly fashion and that all the speakers will respect the laws of the land.”

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

Historic change to Union control over Student Direct

Student Direct: Mancunion is now free to publish material on candidates standing in Union elections, thanks to a Union council vote last week.

The council voted to amend long-standing election regulations that prevent the newspaper from referring to candidates by name or printing articles written by an election candidate.

“This decision has been a long time in the making,” said Jennie Agg, Editor of the newspaper. “While it doesn’t give Student Direct: Mancunion full rights to publish about the elections, it will at least enable us to tell students the bare facts about what’s going on.”

UMSU Communications Officer Tom Fairhurst, who tabled the motion, said, “Students will be able to turn to their newspaper to know about the student elections. This change will increase participation, increase knowledge of the candidates and can only encourage democracy.”

The Union council voted in favour of the motion titled ‘Election Regulations and Fair Reporting’, which was seconded by Agg. The motion was previously tabled on December 1 2009, but was narrowly defeated.

Voting rules on overturning the Union constitution required that at least 20 of the 29 council members voted in favour of amendment. After the longest debate of the evening, 22 council members voted for, while five voted against the motion and two chose to abstain.

The new rules will allow candidates to write for and be referred to in the paper everywhere except for the opinion and politics sections. There is also a caveat that precludes ‘editorialised’ coverage of candidates.

Hisham Omara, studying for a PhD in Electrical Engineering and member of council, voted against the motion. He said the motion’s claim that the printing of candidates’ names during the election period would not affect the results needed substantiating. Omara said, “I think you have to back up the claim with scientific research. If they have no effect on elections, why have them at all?”

Agg, however, continued: “Clearly, this was an amazingly positive decision for the Union. I mean, can you imagine trying to report on an election without being allowed to print the candidates’ names? It’s hard to believe that such a rule was kept in place for so long. The phrase ‘cutting off your nose to spite your face’ springs to mind.”

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

Police team up with Fallowfield bars in new student safety initiative

Greater Manchester Police have set up an operation to protect and police students in Fallowfield. Operation Glaven, headed by Sergeant Andrew Tunnicliffe, was set up for the prevention of anti-social behaviour, violent crime and drug offences. The operation also aims to raise consciousness of Rape Awareness Week.

Sgt. Tunnicliffe said: “Operation Glaven is to combat public order offences, anti-social behaviour, violent crime and drug offences. The operation is run in the Fallowfield area and in student accommodation. Since the operation has started, we have been invited onto Owens Park and into three bars.”

The University have permitted police presence at Owens Park for the first six weeks of term. GMP said police presence led to a sharp decline in anti-social behaviour. They were also there to talk to students, giving advice and handing out personal attack alarms to female students.

The operation involves officers, with a drug-detection dog, patrolling bars and clubs that are popular with students in the Fallowfield area. The team talk to the licensees and staff, as well as students and other customers.

When asked which bars or clubs were worst affected by violence and criminality, Inspector Sarah Morton from the Rusholme, Fallowfield and Whalley Range Neighbourhood Policing Team said: “It depends on the night, but generally the worst are Queen of Hearts, Baa Bar, Revolution and Robinski’s. Anywhere that is open late. But all four have come on board [with Operation Glaven]. They have better door staff and stop serving people who are clearly drunk.”

Lucy Czok, Assistant Manager of Revolution in Fallowfield, discussed a stabbing that had happened at the bar a few months ago. She said: “To be honest, it’s the first time that an incident like that has happened in this bar, and it has been here for 10 years. It’s a one-off occurrence. We’ve now put measures in place so it won’t happen again. We were quite shocked when it happened. We weren’t expecting it.”

She added: “We’ve built up a good relationship with [Operation Glaven]. They come in once or twice a week; have a walk round and a chat. It makes us feel a lot safer, the customers feel safer, the staff feel safer and hopefully the community feel safer. If it puts people off [coming into the bar] then they are not the sorts of people we want in.”

Fallowfield Revolution has changed its door team and also added a new scanning system for student IDs. Only students will be allowed into the bar in the near future.

GMP commented that they wanted to be a positive force for students, as well as policing anti-social behaviour. Sgt. Tunnicliffe said: “Students are starting a new chapter in their lives, and many will not have been away from home before. Let their first contact with the police be a positive one, rather than them having to report something or be a victim of something. There is a balance required between welcoming the students as part of the community and their need to recognise the permanent residents right to peace.

“The way we look at it is that students are here for three or four years. And we don’t look at them as visitors, but we look at them as part of the community while they are here. We want to make sure students are welcome in Manchester and feel part of the community.”

During Rape Awareness Week, Sgt. Tunnicliffe advised his team to raise awareness amongst young women about the dangers of drinking, stressing: “If you are going to drink to excess, get taxis or walk home with friends.

“[When] we have had reports of [sexual assault], it tends to be student-on-student. It’s this concept of, if you have had a few to drink, does ‘no’ mean ‘no’ or does ‘no’ mean ‘yes’? This is something we are promoting, and the message needs to be reinforced to people.”

Drug offences are also a target of the operation. Sgt. Tunnicliffe said that people found with drugs “get checked out [for previous offences]. If they have no previous drug-related offence, we give them a street caution, then an £80 fine and finally an arrest. But we try and avoid arresting people.”

The team were also advised on ways suspects could be caught for more serious offences. “Experience has shown that suspects will hand over small amounts of cannabis in the hope of receiving a street caution, but may still have possession of further amounts of prohibited drugs. Therefore we are asking officers to thoroughly search [suspects].”

Inspector Sarah Morton said: “Over the initial period that Operation Glaven has been running, we have seen encouraging results in terms of reducing anti-social behaviour, violent crime and sexual assault in the student bar areas of Fallowfield.

“Compared to the same period last year, there have been four less incidents of assault. This means that at least four fewer people have been victims. To date, this operation has also seen positive results in terms of reducing robbery and sexual assaults/rapes, with no incidents of this nature being reported in the area where the operation has been running.

“However, we will not be complacent and the Glaven team will continue to be on hand when the bars close to help ensure people take a sensible route home and stick with their friends.”

Hazel Kent, the University of Manchester Students’ Union Women’s Officer, gave a mixed reaction to Operation Glaven and the work they are doing. She said: “It’s great the police are taking an active interest in student safety. Hammering home the message of ‘no means no’, irrespective of alcohol intake, is really important to preventing sexual assault.

“I am a little disappointed however that I wasn’t consulted on this campaign, as it is something I would have liked to take an active role in. Many women do feel unsafe in these areas at night, and often come to my office for personal attack alarms. However most rapes are committed by someone who knows the victim, rather than a stranger. The change in police rhetoric from telling women what not to do, to putting the emphasis on the potential assailant to get consent is a refreshing and important development.”

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

Action Palestine’s guest speaker charged with anti-Semitism in South Africa

A speaker was forced to pull out of an Action Palestine lecture held at the University of Manchester because of charges of anti-Semitism. Bongani Masuku, International Secretary for the South African trade union federation, was due to speak at an Action Palestine event on Monday December 7. He was forced to return to South Africa to defend the charges levelled at him by the South African Human Rights Commission.

Masaku allegedly told students at Wits University in Johannesburg that anyone supporting the actions of Israel and the Israeli military should be exiled from South Africa. Blogs suggests that Masuku comments included “no pro-Israel Jews should ever consider South Africa to be their home.” Blogs also reported that Masuku said Zionists “must face the consequences even if it means that we will do something that may cause what is regarded as harm” and “Zionists, I don’t care whether you are at Wits or Orange Grove, your life will be hell.”

The Human Rights Commission found his comments to be “of an extreme nature that advocate and imply that the Jewish and Israeli community are to be despised, scorned, ridiculed and thus subjecting them to ill-treatment on the basis of their religious affiliation.”

Masuku was asked to make a public apology within 14 days, failing which the matter will come before the Equality Court.

Jaime Woodcock, a member of Action Palestine, said that Bongani Masuku missed the talk “to return to South Africa. He had to return to appear in court.”

The South Africa Trade Union Congress are appealing Masuku’s charges, as they believe they are without foundation and that he was charged without a hearing. Tanzil Chowdhury, Chair of Action Palestine at the UMSU said: “Charges of anti-Semitism were levelled against him because he criticised the Israeli apartheid in Gaza and the West Bank.

“Accusing anyone that criticises Israeli policies in the West Bank and Gaza of anti-Semitism is a way of removing credibility. If I was to criticise the Saudi Arabian government, I would not be accused of Islamaphobia.”

The event caused difficulties for both the University and the Students’ Union. Union procedure requires external speakers to submit a form if the speaker is likely to prove controversial. In this case, the Action Palestine submitted two forms; one stating he is a contentious figure and one indicating otherwise. Woodcock said: “The Vice-Chancellor believed the discussion should go ahead in the spirit of academic freedom. As long as there was no breaking of the law, he was happy.”

A spokesperson from the University of Manchester said: “The University is fundamentally committed to ensuring freedom of speech within the law.

“This particular event was organised by a recognised Students’ Union Society and hosted by the Students’ Union, rather than the University itself. The University sought assurances from the Student Society and the Students’ Union that the event would be conducted in an orderly fashion and that all the speakers would respect the laws of the land. The University received written assurances on both these points.”

The Vice-Chancellor did, however, ask the Union to take legal responsibility for the event when it emerged that Masuku had been charged and had to return to South Africa to appeal. President and Vice-Chancellor, Professor Alan Gilbert, asked UMSU General Secretary, Gabriel Hassan, to discuss the controversial speaker and asked that Hassan and the UMSU to accept full legal responsibility for the event.

The event, which was held in co-ordination with the British Committee for the Universities of Palestine, was organised to highlight the Palestine Right to Education week at the University. UMSU policy was passed at the General Meeting in March 2007 for the support of right for Palestinian citizens to have access to all levels of academia, including university education.

Ronnie Kasrils, another speaker at the event, is a former African National Congress member and fought the apartheid in South Africa. He is outspoken against the treatment of Palestinian people and Israeli policies in West Bank and Gaza. He is also of Jewish descent. Chowdhury said, “[Kasrils] is [of Jewish decent] and would not share a stage with someone who was anti-Semitic.”

“There is no empirical basis for the evidence and yet he was taken to court. The claims are unfounded and done in order to gag [Masuku].

“Action Palestine has a strong line on anti-Semitism. It’s not welcome at our meetings or in anything that we do. The idea that we would platform someone anti-Semitic is pathetic.”

“If the pro-Israeli lobby had any problem with the [academic] boycott – rather than discussing or debate it, they shout ‘anti-Semitism’.”

Ruth Arkush, Campaigns Officer for the Jewish Society, organised a protest before the event. The Jewish Society handed out Israeli drinks and leaflets objecting to the academic boycott of Israel. Security staff asked the protesters to leave.

Arkush said, “We object to the invitation that was given to Bongani Masuku to speak at last Monday’s event following his condemnation by the South African Human Rights Commission for inciting racial hatred towards the Jewish community of South Africa. These provocations that were unacceptable in South Africa are equally unacceptable in the UK.

“We were anxious that his taking part in the event would spread this hatred on campus and would foster hostility towards the Jewish students present. The fact that this kind of person was invited shows that the organisers were not interested in having a fair and even-handed debate.

“Manchester Jewish Society supports constructive engagement with Israel and the Palestinians, and oppose the extreme actions of those who desire the destruction of Israel.”

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

MMU and University of Bolton face job losses

Job losses threaten to hit universities across Manchester as Government funding dwindles.

Manchester Metropolitan University could potentially lose 127 support staff as they struggle to cope with financial pressures. Martyn Moss, the University and College Union (UCU) Regional Officer for the Northwest, said: “From the UCU point-of-view, we are deeply concerned at how it might affect the quality of teaching, learning and the student experience.”

Meanwhile the University of Bolton could potentially lose 10 per cent of its teaching staff.

Professor Peter Marsh, the University’s Vice-Chancellor said: “To ensure that the University of Bolton remains financially strong, [the University will] increase alternative sources of income and reduce costs by efficiency savings.

“The University’s management is working hard with our Unions to minimise the impact of potential cuts by looking at voluntary job losses wherever possible, and we have already saved almost £1m a year as a consequence of our actions.”

Plans for 150 compulsory redundancies at the University of Salford were abandoned last July after proof the university had filled the £7.5 million hole in its budget.

Other universities are also being forced to address funding issues. The University of Birmingham is considering closing down its Sociology department entirely, whilst the University of Bristol may be forced to cut 250 jobs by 2012.

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

University’s environmental credentials fail to make the grade

A third class honours degree was awarded to the University of Manchester in Environmental Performance at a mock graduation ceremony by People and Planet campaigners.

The performance was staged outside University Place, with the group handing a ‘degree’ over to the University of Manchester, represented by a student in mortarboard and gown. The ceremonial speech included the key areas that the university had failed to excel, according to the environmental activists.

The degree represents the University’s place in the Green League 2009, a league table compiled by People and Planet that ranks universities according to their green credentials. The University of Manchester was ranked 87th out of 126 universities that were reviewed. Nottingham Trent University ranked highest on the table, while Royal College of Music, London was ranked the lowest.

Lawrence Wynne, a second year Philosophy and History student and performer in the event, said the University is “not doing enough for environmental issues and not doing enough to lower carbon emissions.”

Andrew McCarthy, a second year PPE student who represented the University of Manchester at the ceremony, said the performance was intended to illicit “stronger action from the University and [raise] awareness to students of how bad the University is on environmental issues.”

He added: “We wanted the event to be a bit more engaging and more positive.”

In the Green League table, universities are rated on areas relevant to environmental issues such as carbon management, environmental policy and water consumption. While the University of Manchester was rated ‘Excellent’ in environmental staffing and ethical investment, it received a ‘Poor’ for environmental policy and ‘Awful’ for carbon management and water consumption.

A University spokesman said: “The University of Manchester takes its responsibilities to the environment seriously both in the research it carries out and on campus. Manchester is home to the UK’s largest, single campus-based community of researchers with interests in sustainability and the environment. On campus, it is committed to the development of sustainable waste management practices and the principles of “reduce, re-use and recycle.
“In line with Government policy, the University is committed to reducing its total carbon footprint by at least 40 per cent by 2020 and is working with the Carbon Trust to implement a carbon management plan. It has also recently been awarded £1m to spend on reducing its carbon footprint and also was awarded the Carbon Trust Standard.”

The group also raised awareness for the Student Sustainability Forum (SSF). The monthly forum allows dialogue between students and staff over environment issues, with some members sitting on University boards. The next SSF meeting takes on Thursday December 3 at 5pm in the Students’ Union.

UMSU Campaigns Officer Laura Williams is collaborating with the University and the SSF on environmental policies. She said: “There is effort being made [by the University] into environmental issues. The University is encouraging students to come to the SSF to discuss environmental issues directly with the University.”

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion

Riveters reclaim the park

The Riveters took to Whitworth Park at night to ‘reclaim the parks’ from violence against women last week.

The Riveters, The University of Manchester Students’ Union Women’s Rights Collective, donned high visibility jackets and took to an area that is considered dangerous for women at night. Safe passage, food and music were provided for anyone wishing to walk through the park at night without fear of physical or sexual violence. Maeve Bishop, a History and Politics student said: “Parks aren’t safe. Something needs to be done to ensure everyone is safe, not just women.”

Samantha Bail, currently studying for a PhD in Computer Sciences said: “I used to live on Moss Lane East but I always used to take the long way around [Whitworth] Park. [The campaign is] a fun idea: to go to places where you would never normally go at night.”

The UMSU’s Women’s Officer, Hazel Kent, is hoping the Reclaim the Parks campaign will highlight the need for “better lighting around parks and bus shelters,” as well as permanent signs in dangerous areas. When asked who would be able to make these changes, she said, “That is part of the problem. Who takes responsibility?”

“The solution should not be to stay at home,” added Bail, “the solution is to improve the situation.”

Original article in Student Direct: Mancunion