JCR Meeting, HT '08 Week 2

Summary of Actions

Mandates:


Money:


Preliminary Business:

Minutes of previous meeting:
Not read out, owing to the V-P having forgotten to bring them. On the basis of the trust of all in the room, many of whom were at the previous meeting, there are no objections

No other matters arising

People:

Chair: Meg Powell-Chandler (President)

Secretary: Tom Carlisle (Vice-President)

Present: Meg Powell-Chandler (President), Tom Carlisle (Vice-President), Joe Fallon (Treasurer), Tom Gover (Admissions and Access Officer), Alexo Scrivener (OUSU Representative), Sophie Rees (Clubs and Society Officer), Carl Gaffney (ENTZ President), Tom Corcoran (International Students Officer), Alex Merry (Male Welfare Officer), Rosalind Brown (LGBT Officer), Jonathan Smart (Libraries and Academic Affairs Officer), Merlin Cooper (Computing and Website Officer), Katie Johnston (Female Welfare Officer), Hannah Al-Hasani (Domestic Officer), Tom Abbott (Accommodation Officer), Mark Hamid (Returning Officer), Rhiannon Ward (Ball President)

Officers Reports:

President (Meg Powell-Chandler):
Became President. Adjusted to having a 'slanty room'. Attended Academic Committee – rebuffed proposals for scholars getting a higher ballot position. Soon to attend governing body. Attended OUSU Council. Held JCR Committee meeting to welcome new committee.

Vice-President (Tom Carlisle):
Settling in, tea rota. Attended OUSU Council and JCR Committee meetings. Organised current JCR meeting.

Treasurer (Joe Fallon):
Sorted out current budget, organised various JCR accounts, signatories for JCR chequebook. Sorting out loose ends from previous administration, mostly cheques that had not been written last term.

Admissions and Access Officer (Tom Gover): Emailed Senior Tutor regarding the Alternative Prospectus, and arranged a meeting of Tom Gover, Meg Powell-Chandler and Dr Watts regarding this

OUSU Representative (Alexo Scrivener): Attended OUSU Council

Clubs and Societies Officer (Sophie Rees): Continuing arranging Corpus Christi Challenge. Sign up sheets for Corpus 'stash' to be put up soon. More information to follow.

ENTZ president (Carl Gaffney): There will be no bops until 5th week... therefore is looking into joint events with other colleges.

International Students Officer (Tom Corcoran): Arranged Stanford tea, to be held on Tuesday of 2nd week at 4pm. “Come along!” Stanford students not on mailing lists; this has been rectified.

Male Welfare Officer (Alex Merry): OUSU now have Durex condoms (in contrast to their previously having 'Safex') – is arranging the details of receiving these

Female Welfare Officer (Katie Johnston): Condoms; attended Peer Support training

LGBT Officer (Roz Brown): Talking to Merton about the possibility of LGBT Formal Hall

Libraries and Academic Affairs Officer (Jonathan Smart): Attended Academic Committee with Meg, has tabled a motion about subject reps in this meeting. Reports that SCR are offering money for clubs wanting to invite speakers furthering academic interests (ie. Debating societies or the now-deceased LitSoc). Offers of prizes for good marks in collections

Computing and Website Officer (Merlin Cooper): General admin regarding the new JCR Committee. Computing Committee meets in third week, when he will attend.

Domestic Officer (Hannah Al-Hasani): Met Colin Holmes regarding Formal Halls, specifically the complaints about over-subscription. Holmes will report back about possible changes to the system. Is looking into problems with washing machines.

Accommodation Officer (Tom Abbott): Sent out an email about accommodation ballot later this term

Returning Officer (Mark Hamid): Little to report, but is running a ballot for the Burns Night dinner on Saturday of Second Week.

Ball President (Rhiannon Ward): Has organised caterer, photographer, marquees, although is struggling given current state of garden. 100 tickets sold. Requested that minutes should show, in block capitals, request to BUY YOUR TICKET NOW! (whole-university publicity has just begun). Creating business cards for Corpuscles to give out to friends.

Joe Macdonald requested that we harass the IT department (Merlin's responsibility) – they are paid by the College, and the state of the JCR Computer Suite does not reflect this

*

Motion 1: Budget

This JCR notes:
1. the JCR treasurer has to produce a budget for each term
2. the following budgets are just projections

This JCR resolves:
1. to approve the budget for Hilary Term 2008


General account
Income College Grant 3845
Arts Levy 1500
Charities Levy 1500
Punt Scheme 3000
Coke Machine 500
Total 10345

Expenditure Loose ends from MT -500
Newspapers, both student and national -900
Coffee Machine -500
Entz -200
Welfare -200
Women’s Tea -100
Men’s Tea -100
ISO -100
Admin/Committee -150
TV Licenses -60
Arts/Clubs/Societies payouts -1500
Charities payouts -1500
Punt Scheme -3500
Audit -200
Total -9410
Net income over expenditure 935
Old balance 3019
New balance 3954


Private account
Expenditure Charities -500
Arts motions -200
Total -700
Net income over expenditure -700
Old balance 10798
New balance 10098


Proposed: Joe Fallon (JCR Treasurer)
Seconded: Tom Rock (JCR Careers Officer)

Motion passed without objections (Nem Con)

2. Closer

This JCR notes:

1. Corpus’s reputation for all things dramatic
2. ‘Closer’ by Patrick Marber in 3rd week at the OFS this term
3. The fact that this is being directed, marketed, produced (and many other
things) by Corpuscles, under the auspices of ‘Charenton Productions’ set up
by Guy Levin and Jonathan Rhodes

This JCR believes

1. That this production deserves Corpus’s support

This JCR resolves

1. To give a pro-rata loan of £300 to this production
2. To go to see this fine play at the OFS this term term (as well,
obviously, as Dead Mother Cabaret, at the O’Reilly, and Quills at the OFS)


Proposed: Guy Levin (Director, Closer | Producer, Quills)
Seconded: Jonathan Rhodes (Director, Quills | Marketing Manager & Assistant Director,
Closer)

Short Factual questions:
// Jonathan Smart asked, when was the last Owlets production? (Jonathan Rhodes is one of the Presidents of the Corpus drama society, Owlets). Guy Levin believed it was the Christmas Pantomime
// Jonathan asked, who wrote it? Jonathan Rhodes replied, Ali Jennings and Mark Peppin – neither of whom are Owlets committee
// Roz Brown wondered what part Owlets played in making it 'Owlets'? Jonny R's answer was that he directed it; equally, in answer to the lack of Owlets activity, he brought up the Corpus exchange (with Corpus Cambridge) in 9th week of this term, with auditions to follow.
// Katie Johnston asked whether there would be any mention of Corpus, or Owlets, in the publicity for Closer. Jonny R answered, there would be if Corpus sponsored it! Logos etc. would appear on programmes.
// Tom Abbott wished to know who else was sponsoring Closer – Magdalen JCR, St. John's Mummers, University JCR, Mansfield JCR and Hertford JCR, apparently.
// David Nickerson asked what 'pro-rata' meant. Guy Levin answered him.


Debate:
// Roz Brown was concerned about the slow decline of Owlets, which was simply not acceptable. There is very little to show for the appointment of the current President and Committee.
// Jonny Rhodes agreed, but claimed that his company, Charenton productions, is made up almost entirely of Corpus individuals, owing to problems attaining funding from the JCR. He had also planned a garden show, more difficult now that the Corpus garden looks like “the Somme”


Motion Passed without objection (Nem Con)

3. Quills

This JCR notes:

1. Corpus’s reputation for all things dramatic
2. ‘Quills’ by Doug Wright in 6th week at the OFS this term
3. The fact that these are being directed, marketed, produced (and many other
things) by Corpuscles, under the auspices of ‘Charenton Productions’ set up
by Guy Levin and Jonathan Rhodes

This JCR believes

1. That this production deserves Corpus’s support

This JCR resolves

1. To give a pro-rata loan of £300 to this production
2. To go to see this fine play at the OFS this term term

Proposed: Jonathan Rhodes (Director, Quills | Marketing Manager & Assistant Director,
Closer)
Seconded: Guy Levin (Director, Closer | Producer, Quills)

Motion Passed Nem Con

4. Hands Up For Darfur

This JCR Notes:

1.The work of Hands Up for Darfur, an initiative launched by a committee of Oxford students who are dedicated to raising awareness and funds for relief agencies in Darfur. Hands Up for Darfur supports two charities: Médecins Sans Frontières, and Kids for Kids. (futher details at the end)
2.The magnitude of the current crisis in Darfur; the US government has recognised that genocide is being committed in Darfur and recent UN estimates suggest that roughly 400,000 people have lost their lives and some 2 million more have been displaced from their homes.
3.Hands Up For Darfur is an apolitical organisation that is trying to raise money for humanitarian aid and awareness about the crisis occurring in Darfur. Therefore, by supporting them the JCR is not making any sort of political statement.
4.The huge potential that Hands Up For Darfur has for raising funds for the humanitarian crisis in Darfur – last year £50,000 was raised for the two aforementioned charities through the Hands up for Darfur Ball. Hands Up... are currently planning a fashion show extravaganza, with the aim of exceeding last year’s fundraising triumph.
5.The need for capital to set up said “fashion show extravaganza”. Hands Up... have asked Corpus Christi JCR to donate £750 from the old private account to HUFD to provide them with money to put on said event.

This JCR Believes:

1.Genocide is a bad thing.
2.Hands Up for Darfur have a proven track record in raising money in order to improve the situations of those driven out of their countries by genocide.
3.£750 is a comparatively small amount to give in order to allow the facilitation of said event which could raise much money to alleviate the circumstances of those in refugee camps.

This JCR Resolves:

1.To give £750 from the old JCR private account to Hands Up for Darfur
2.To encourage its members to support the work of Hands Up for Darfur, attend said “extravaganza” and give generously.


Proposed: Sarah Murray-Gates
Seconded: Leora Kelman

Further information on these charities:

Médecins Sans Frontiers is an independent aid agency committed to providing medical assistance in the refugee camps and Darfur villages. Kids for Kids is a local Sudanese charity which is engaged in numerous projects in villages under threat in the area that enable their inhabitants to become self-sufficient.

Short Factual Questions
// Alex Merry asked what proportion of the total cost was £750? Sarah Murray-Gates (SMG) answered, probably £10,000, but Leora is not here and she has the knowledge. They had £6000 at the end of last term
// Joe MacDonald asked whether HFD had put on a fashion show before. SMG said no, but they are using people who know what they are doing – such as Julian MacDonald, for example.
// Tom Abbott asked, how much does the fashion show hope to raise. SMG did not know, but the last event made £30,000 profit.
// Katie Johnston asked whether there was any guarantee of raising the money? SMG said that the £20,000-30,000 was fairly firmly predicted.
// Joe MacDonald wanted to know when the fashion show would be. SMG answered, early Trinity term, not during finals.

Debate
// Joe MacDonald thought it was a good idea, but needed more information. Asked if we could put the motion off until the next meeting in 5th week.
// SMG claimed that the money needs to be spent soon, owing to various deposits which need paying
// Joe MacDonald asked if £10,000 was literally all that was needed. SMG answered, it will finally be closer to £16,000. Joe asked if HFD could come to Corpus, asking how much of a problem it would be to put it off.
// Meg Powell-Chandler asked where HFD had got the rest of its money from, and whether it had any money from other JCRs. SMG claimed that Corpus has typically had a high involvement in the planning stages of HFD events and it is reasonable to expect them to want to be involved.
// Mark Peppin suggested that an extraordinary meeting 'would not be that hard'
// Alex Merry proposed a friendly amendment, from Resolves 1 “old private account” to simply “give £750” - it is the Treasurer's prerogative to decide which account. // Upheld
//Tom Abbott was concerned that we give out £500 to two charities as a JCR per term - £750 is more than £500, and given out in one go?
//Mark Hamid suggested withdrawing the motion, for if it was lost, it could not be brought again this year.


Motion withdrawn.

Procedural motion to move motion 9. Amnesty International to being Motion 5. No objections.

5. Amnesty International

This JCR notes
1.That Oxford University Amnesty International OUAI carries out valuable work across the university, in campaigning for the cause of human rights.
2.Many Corpus people are involved in OUAI
3.That OUAI is entirely dependent on outside donations and fundraising for the conduct of its campaigns, such as weekly Letter Writing Lunches and speaker events.

This JCR Believes:
1.Supporting OUAI is valuable, both for its members and for its causes

This JCR resolves:
1. to assist OUAI by donating the sum of £20 £50

Proposed: Racheal Hamilton (AI Rep for Corpus)
Seconded: Ruth Simister (AI Rep for Corpus)

Short Factual Questions:
// Roz Brown asked when the next OUAI letter write is? Ruth Simister answered, she does not know yet.
// Guy Levin wondered why it was only £20, proposing a friendly amendment to £50 instead. // Upheld

Speeches:
Ruth argued that it was a small amount of money, and OUAI is sustained by donations.
Mark Hamid disagrees with Amnesty's stance of abortion, being pro-choice

Passed by overwhelming majority

6. Subject Reps

This JCR notes that:
1.In the report of the working group on academic performance, recently discussed in Academic Committee, it was recommended that the role and selection of subject representatives should be changed in order to raise the prestige of these positions so that they are sought after and to ensure that they are filled by committed and diligent individuals.
2.Subject representatives are currently selected either by private arrangement within subjects or by the JCR Libraries and Academic Affairs Officer from those who volunteer in a particular subject. Academic Committee feels that these methods do not sufficiently control the suitability of those who will be offering advice to students within their subject and to potential applicants and would like there to be tutor approval for subject reps, who would be proposed by their peers.
3.At present, there is a wide disparity between the activities of subject reps, some of whom are very active and volunteer for interviews and open days as well as organise events like Mods chats, and others who are not. Academic Committee would like those who are subject reps to commit to helping at interviews and open days if they are available.
4.In recognition of the increased burden that would be placed on subject reps (and the restriction on the JCR’s prerogative in selecting subject reps owing to the need for tutors’ permission), Academic Committee is keen to offer remuneration for subject reps, subject to approval by Governing Body, so that the post is regarded as prestigious and worthwhile.
5.The current subject reps did not know about any of this when they took their positions and have not been approved by their tutors.

This JCR believes that:
1.The current system of subject reps needs to be improved and lacks accountability.
2.The SCR is entitled to some oversight in the selection of representatives who are offered on the JCR website as people to contact about their subject before applying in order to ensure the right message is being sent out.
3.The search for interview and open day volunteers would be made much easier if subject reps had more of a duty (and reward) to volunteer.
4.If this motion is passed, our current subject reps will need to seek the approval of their tutors to continue in their (expanded) role.

This JCR resolves to:
1.Mandate the JCR President and the JCR Libraries and Academic Affairs Officer to work with the Senior Tutor and Academic Committee to redesign the role of subject reps such that they will be selected by their peers but approved by their tutors and will be remunerated in exchange for their efforts.

Proposed by: Jonathan Smart
Seconded by: Meg Powell-Chandler (JCR President)

Short Factual Questions:
// Mark Peppin wanted to know what level of renumeration was being offered. Jonathan Smart answered, this still needs approval.
// Becky Driscoll wanted to know how future reps would be chosen. Jonathan answered, they would still be chosen by the JCR's members, only subject to approval
// Alexo Scrivener was worried about the possibility of constitutional deadlock if the SCR rejected candidates that the JCR liked. Jonathan Smart claimed, no, the SCR will win.
// Meg Powell-Chandler added, it was not about choosing the academic crème de la crème, merely that the people representing their subjects were committed and dedicated
// Mark Peppin did not think that current reps needed to step down given that the motion was 'not yet complete'. Jonathan answered, the motion is fine – there are no mandates to subject reps. It is a matter of courtesy; raising it so that they can be consulted.


Debate:
// Joe Macdonald worried about a conflict of interest with individuals representing fellow students to their tutors but also being paid by the SCR. Jonathan Smart claimed that individuals would basically be paid on the interviews they went to, open days etc.
// Joe also wanted to know whether individuals would be paid for specific days, or a more 'salaried' rate. This was subject to approval.
// Sophie Rees wondered why that there was any kind of renumeration; was it not enough just to have free accommodation? Jonathan claimed that the college was trying to recreate the position, and to enlist people who genuinely want to be reps.
// Alex Merry offered a point of information to Joe Macdonald – subject reps do not represent their fellow students to tutors; they represent the college to prospective applicants and are hired to be mentors, to get alongside students (ie. Maths tea etc.)
// Joe Macdonald was wondering when the reps would be appointed. This is pending approval.

Motion passed Nem Con

Procedural motion to move OUSU Emergency Motion to point 7. on agenda // agreed.

7. Emergency Motion // 'No Platform' (again)

This JCR Notes:
1.The debate about OUSU’s “No Platform” policy has gone on since Michaelmas of 2007. It is now January 2008.
2. In Michaelmas 2007 10 JCRs requested a referendum on the “No Platform” policy by the end of that term. When it got to Hilary, OUSU stated that there should be no referendum, as it was now ‘not Michaelmas’
3. OUSU have been spectacularly elusive about what is an exceptionally controversial issue
4. Popular pressure is that OUSU is an undemocratic and elitist organisation, which makes ‘top-down’ decisions, and their “No Platform” policy – which is to say, the policy itself, as opposed to their reaction to it – is the prime example of this
5. Democracy, in this context, is a useful tool with which to hold the OUSU Executive accountable

This JCR Believes:
1. That its members should be educated about the issue at hand (much of OUSU’s problem with the referendum in Michaelmas was owing to ‘a lack of education’)
2. It is important to know the opinions of the members who the JCR President, OUSU Representative and third delegate represent at OUSU Council meetings
3. A quick resolution to this whole debate is immensely desirable

This JCR Resolves:
1. For the JCR President to concede the Chair in order to allow her to propose one side of the argument, and the OUSU Representative to propose the opposite, allowing for an educated open forum on this issue.
2. To have a debate, following the open forum, on whether or not a referendum is the correct course of action
3. To inform OUSU, at the next OUSU Council meeting, that Corpus JCR desires a referendum on the ‘No Platform’ policy
1. To uphold its previous decision to request OUSU hold a referendum on whether it should maintain it's 'No Platform' policy.
2. To express its disappointment at the morally reprehensible nature of OUSU's actions in trying to get out of holding a referendum.'

Proposed: Meg Powell-Chandler (JCR President)
Seconded: Tom Carlisle (JCR Vice-President)

Debate
// Alex Merry proposes an amendment. Scrap 'resolves' – replace with 'Resolves: 1. To uphold its previous decision to request OUSU hold a referendum on whether it should maintain it's 'No Platform' policy. 2. To express its disappointment at the morally reprehensible nature of OUSU's actions in trying to get out of holding a referendum.' // Upheld
// Becky Driscoll wanted to know whether a referendum would be almost certain to get rid of the whole No-Platform issue. Alexo Scrivener pointed out, not necessarily – this is OUSU
// Meg claimed that quite a few people support the referendum who might change their mind if they knew the truth about the changes. However, it is a point of principle; democracy should be upheld, and OUSU should not be allowed to overrule grass-roots decisions.
// Alexo Scrivener claimed that the new policy does not restrict freedom of speech – ie. The OxStu and OXIDE radio have independent editorial control. But arguably OUSU are being patronising in their claim that we were not 'educated' enough before, and the question is whether the desire to rebuke OUSU is bigger than the desire to end this issue.
// Mark Hamid asked if OUSU Council was fundamentally Labour-ruled, and unlikely to even change. Scrivener rejected this – change is apparently coming, and its name is Lewis Iwu.
// Tom Abbott asks about the Policy Document. Meg checks.
Move to Vote: (15 in favour, 7 against, 8 abstain)
// Scrivener: (in favour) We passed the motion before. OUSU is trying to over-rule us. That's just not on. We have to show them we won't take it.
// Meg: (opposing) A referendum will cost £400 and distract attention away from 'important things' – such as sorting out dodgy landlords and talking to councils and colleges; £400 is the cost of an average open day for a state school. Are we being self-indulgent?


Motion passed by overwhelming majority

8. Coffee Machine

This JCR notes:
1.The JCR coffee machine is held under a five-year contract, which has just entered itsfourth year this week, with a local company called Vendcare.
2.Said contract is nominally a 'self-billing arrangement', whereby we splash out a fixed £497 per quarter (or almost £2000 per year) on the right to have it, and for upkeep (plus the occasional extra bill for parts)......and in return for which the JCR gets a cut of the cups sold. This figure arises from Vendcare sending us a supposedly-monthly letter informing us of their version (as recorded by the people who come to check on the machine), which we confirm by checking a tally on its computer display (a key for which purpose the JCR domestic officer is supposed to have), then writing them our bill.

This JCR further notes:
1.That Vendcare have taken our money reliably and promptly, albeit under 'GE Capital Financing' on the JCR bank statement. (GE Capital are the scum, by the way, whom the major shop chains get to administer those store cards with 32% annual interest rates.)
2.Vendcare have not at any point paid us as per the self-billing arrangement, and so over two years of treasurers' bills, ignored phone calls and emails culminated last April in a JCR claim filed in court and a subsequent near-£1800 payout.
3.That the JCR still has not heard from them since then, or received any explanation as to why they had been so bad at paying out previously (since they did not challenge the claim), and that communication has declined from receiving a sporadic estimate of what they owed us (but not getting paid), to not even getting that estimate.
4.That, even had they paid up reliably throughout, the machine has always made a loss, a good example being the aforementioned £1800 income (which probably ought to have been a bit more because of some gaps in their self-invoicing), which has to compare to over £4k of upkeep payments in the same period.

This JCR believes:
1. That Vendcare should have paid up reliably from the start.
2.That they are incorrigible in their habit of not doing so.
3.That the JCR should not as a general point of policy take on commitments that lose it money.
4.That our apparently limited need for coffee, at least from that machine, cannot justify the losses.
5.That Vendcare's lamentable performance justifies, and our dislike of JCR financial losses encourages, backing out of our side of a contract that they have already repeatedly violated.

This JCR resolves:
1.To ask any lawyers at the meeting if, given the facts they have heard here, and if necessary, showing them the contract and other documents in the treasurer's file, to end our contract would be tickety-boo by the standards of the law.
2.If so, to mandate the treasurer to write Vendcare a letter by recorded post informing them in full of our gripes, specifying a time period for them to come up with some outstanding self-invoices and some pretty good explanations, or toface us cancelling our direct debit. (Or whatever any lawyers might tell us is the correct procedure in such cases).
3.And if all the above (or a better alternative as suggested by the lawyers) is executed without a satisfactory response from them, to mandate the treasurer to cancel our direct debit.
1. ask a law fellow on what is the best way to proceed in this case

Proposed: Joe Fallon
Seconded: Seb Page

Short Factual Questions:
// Hannah Al-Hasani pointed out we lease the snack machine from Vendcare too, on a dual lease – lose coffee machine, lose that.
// Mark Peppin wanted to know, how long would we be without machines were we to leave Vendcare? Hannah reckoned she could have it sorted by Trinity term, working it out over Easter Vac. Tom Abbott mentioned 'West Coast Vending Machines' who would be a good replacement, from his research.
// Dave Nickerson was concerned about the loss of the Coke machine. This is not the case.

Debate
Friendly amendment: scrap all 'resolves', replace with “1. ask a law fellow on what is the best way to proceed in this case” // Upheld
Mark Hamid was concerned. If Vendcare are not good at contracts, will they even get around to moving machines? Alexo Scrivener suggested selling them on Ebay...

Motion passed nem con


9. Bikes

This JCR Notes:
1. A number of JCR members make use of bicycles to travel around Oxford
2. These JCR members need somewhere to store these bicycles
3. The current bike sheds are filled with rusting bikes, many of these owned by ex-members of the JCR
4. To remove these bikes without the consent of their owners would be unreasonable, but there is no easy way to get in touch with them

This JCR Believes;
1. Its members deserve to have somewhere to store their bikes
2. It is not that difficult to discreetly label your bike and hand your details in to the Porters or relevant college authority (and therefore we should do it!)

This JCR Resolves:
1. To mandate the Domestic Officer to speak to the Domestic Bursar and investigate a system (such as that currently in place at Queens' College) where storage of bikes requires some form of registration
2. To vote in any further motions regarding the removal of bikes whose owners have left Corpus
1. To have JCR Domestic Officer liase with the Domestic Bursar to adopt a bike clearance system similar to the 'brown sticker' system in place in the Liddell Building.
2. To have a clearance of bike sheds at the end of Hilary term '08, and further clearances in Trinity of future years.
3. To mandate the Domestic Officer to inform people of the extra bike space available in the Corpus Christi car park

Proposed: Tom Carlisle (JCR Vice-President)
Seconded: Meg Powell-Chandler (JCR President)

Debate:
// Tom Abbott suggested a termly bike clearance, like that which happens in Liddell buildings, as opposed to yearly.
Friendly amendment proposed. Scrap “resolves”, replace with “Resolves: 1. To have JCR Domestic Officer liase with the Domestic Bursar to adopt a bike clearance system similar to the 'brown sticker' system in place in the Liddell Building. 2. To have a clearance of bike sheds at the end of Hilary term '08, and further clearances in Trinity of future years. 3. To mandate the Domestic Officer to inform people of the extra bike space available in the Corpus Christi car park” Upheld


Motion passed Nem Con

10. Fairtrade

This JCR notes:
1. Many of the members of the JCR believe that international trade does not always contribute positively to the welfare of those living in the developing world.
2.World commodity prices for many agricultural commodities, such as tea, coffee, sugar and cotton, have dropped dramatically in the last two decades.
3. Fairtrade guarantees a fair price for producers in the developing world and ensures minimum standards of social welfare and environmental sustainability, while also helping producers to gain better access to world markets.
4.The Fairtrade Foundation has recently decided to offer ‘Fairtrade college’ status to colleges that meet the five Fairtrade college criteria (see appendix).
5. Many colleges are currently working towards Fairtrade college status and that if two-thirds of colleges become Fairtrade colleges Oxford becomes an official ‘Fairtrade University’.
6. In 2004, Oxford Brookes became Britain’s first Fairtrade University.

This JCR believes:
1.That Fairtrade products should be available at all catering outlets in college
2. This is a matter of choice, so those who wish to continue eating and drinking unethical products should be free to do so
3. Fairtrade college status is a good way of promoting Fairtrade within college and provides an incentive for continuity and permanence in Fairtrade provision.
4. By becoming a Fairtrade college Corpus Christi can act as a model and inspiration to Fairtrade campaigning in other Oxford colleges.
5. Corpus Christi should fulfil the five criteria for the achievement of Fairtrade college status.

This JCR resolves:
1. To support the implementation of policies that fulfil the five Fairtrade college criteria.
2. Mandate the JCR Eco-rep to represent the JCR Committee on a Corpus Christi Fairtrade steering group.
3. Review current Fairtrade provision in all catering outlets in college.
4. Ensure that a Fairtrade alternative is available wherever a product is: i) already stocked in non-Fairtrade form and ii) currently available in Fairtrade form.
5. Provide Fairtrade products at all JCR meetings where non-Fairtrade alternatives are already served.
6. Provide information to JCR members about the benefits of Fairtrade, e.g. by displaying promotional materials in the JCR.
1. Mandate the JCR Eco-Rep to look into putting more Fairtrade products in college and setting up a Fairtrade steering group in order to work out how this can best be done.
2. To return to the JCR with a more detailed action plan drawn out of this consultation.

Proposed: Becky Driscoll
Seconded: Ele Grieveson

// see appendix I for Fairtrade criteria

Short Factual Questions:
// Mark Peppin wanted to know how economically damaging Fairtrade would be to the JCR. Becky answered, lots of colleges do it, and can regularly make a college – such as Dubble bars, or Oriel's selling of “Divine” chocolate
// Tom Abbott asked if a member of college would be asked to join the proposed steering group, and expressed concern about their likelihood to want to be involved given time commitments. Becky said that this would be looked into.
// Rhiannon Ward was curious about the possibility of a Fairtrade vending machine. This was not the plan, and the motion is mostly to get people looking into the issue, claimed Becky. Rhiannon asked if Becky would later table another, more detailed and specific motion. Becky agreed.


Debate:

Tom Abbott suggested scrapping “resolves 1-6” and replacing with “resolves: 1. Mandate the JCR Eco-Rep to look into putting more Fairtrade products in college and setting up a Fairtrade steering group in order to work out how this can best be done. 2. To return to the JCR with a more detailed action plan drawn out of this consultation.” // Upheld


Motion Passed Nem Con


11. Poet Laureate

This JCR Notes:
1. Nick Bamford is the Corpus' JCR's official Poet Laureate
2. Since being appointed, Nick has written comparatively few Odes
3. It is a new year - this is a cause for celebration. There is a new JCR committee - this, too, is (hopefully) a cause for celebration.
4. Celebrations call for Odes!

This JCR Believes:
1. Bamford must fulfill his role as Poet Laureate (or else his position runs the risk of being classified as a joke, and that would be... well, a tragedy)
2. Occasions of celebration require commemoration.
3. There must be Odes!

This JCR Resolves:
1. To mandate Nick Bamford to write an Ode to the new year, the previous and incoming JCR Committee and Corpus itself, and to present it, either acoustically or simply by lyrics, at the next JCR meeting of term.
2. To buy Nick Bamford a pint of ale for his efforts

Proposed: Tom "Odes, Odes, Odes" Carlisle (JCR Vice-President)
Seconded: Dave Nickerson (Barfly)

Short Factual Questions:
// Rhiannon Ward asked, do we have to sit through the result. Tom answered, yes. Rhiannon asked, how long must it be? Suggestion that it could be put on during Burns Night owing to Nick's Scottish connection. General derision that it would be done on time.
// Tom Abbott asked if it could be a haiku, both to help Nick and cut down on listening time. This was rejected.

Debate:
Meg proposed a friendly amendment, to add to resolves “2. To buy Nick Bamford a pint of ale for his efforts” // Upheld
Motion passed Nem Con


***

Appendix 1. // Fairtrade standards

1.The JCR and the college authority both create a Fairtrade policy incorporating the following goals. A member of the JCR committee and a representative of the college would each take primary responsibility for implementing this policy.

2.Set up a Fairtrade steering group. This group will meet at least once a term to reflect on the progress of each of these goals, and decide how to go about continuing to excel in these goals. The group would include a representative from the following groups:
the catering organisation
a staff member (e.g. bursar)
the JCR committee
an appropriate society (e.g. Fairtrade coalition rep)
each associated institution

3.Fairtrade foods are made available for sale in all shops/ cafes/ restaurants/ bars on campus. Foods to be sold would be those sold by the shops at present in non-Fairtrade form that are available in Fairtrade form.

4.Fairtrade foods are served at all meetings hosted by the college authority and the JCR, and are served in all college and JCR management offices.

5.There is a commitment to campaign for increased Fairtrade consumption in the college. The following methods must be used. The steering group could propose other means.
Fairtrade foundation materials displayed on notice boards in the hall and JCR, and promoting commitment to Fairtrade foods. Materials also displayed in every place where Fairtrade foods are sold.

Fairtrade Fortnight (March) – this is the opportunity to promote Fairtrade foods and increase sales. The college would commit itself to running a series of events during Fairtrade fortnight. The steering group in collaboration with other appropriate bodies would be responsible for this.

Other opportunities – the steering group should seek opportunities to promote the Fairtrade mark at related events – for example those which focus on trade and development. The steering group is required to send a full report to the Fairtrade Foundation, explaining how each goal has been achieved, in order for status to be awarded. For the college’s status to be retained, the steering group is expected to develop the goals and send the report at the end of every academic year to the Fairtrade Foundation.

***

Emergency Motion // Assassins

This JCR notes:

1. for the past four years, a charity game of Assassins has been played in
Corpus.
2. in previous years, the winner has not only received the glory, honour and
Airzooka fitting to their position, but also the title of JCR Assassin.
3. this year's game, in aid of Breast Cancer Awareness, starts in third week.

This JCR believes

1. letting out any homicidal tendencies via Assassins is a Good Thing.
2. raising money for charity is an Even Better Thing.
3. in view of the upcoming Challenge, it is important to hone our skills
against the more subtle tactics that may be employed by the Tabs.

This JCR resolves

1. to encourage as many people as possible to join in Assassins.
2. to award the title of JCR Assassin to the eventual winner.

Proposed
Alex Merry
Seconded
Matthew Sullivan

Motion Passed Nem Con

End of meeting – next meeting of term is Sunday Week 5