Hilary 2005

Minutes of Postgraduate Assembly
Thursday, 27 January 2005

Present:
Siobhan McAndrew              Vice President (Graduates)
David Patrick Russell            St. Antony’s MCR OUSU Rep
Sreeram Ramagopalan        Corpus MCR OUSU Rep
Julian Brown                       St. Antony’s MCR President
Denny Wahl                        Trinity MCR President
Laura Beesemyer                St. Hilda’s MCR OUSU Rep
Tani Mauriello                     St. Hilda’s MCR President
Chris Hanretty                    St. Anne’s MCR Vice President
Wen Shi                             Magdalen & OUSU Grad Exec
Ruth Smith                        Somerville
Zachary Kaufman               Magdalen
Adam Grogg                       Lincoln
Scott Grinsell                     Magdalen
Robert Schiff                      New
Tom Packer                        St. Cross & OUSU Grad Exec
Samantha Bassler              Merton MCR OUSU Rep
Justin Roffey                      Wadham & Grad exec
Mark J Crowley                   LMH MCR President
Bex Wilkinson                    Vice President (Women)
Ian King                            Vice President (Charity and Community)

Apologies from John Blake, Linsey Cole, Nicky Ellis.

A question was asked about the minutes: no motions were ratified at Council, only the elections in PGA.
Minutes passed nem con.

Elections:

Advisory Panel on Disabilities (one member):

Wen Shi (Magd) spoke on behalf of Adam Grogg (Lincoln). Adam mentioned the poor provision for disabled students in Oxford. He was elected without opposition.

Property investment sub-committee (one member):

Sreeram Ramagopalan (CCC) stood, and was unopposed.

JCC with student members (two members):
Daniel Russell (SAC) and Sreeram Ramagopalan (CCC) stood and were unopposed.

Committee on Student Hardship:
Chris Hanretty (St. Anne’s) stood and was unopposed.

Clubs Committee:
Tom Packer (St. X)

Rules Committee:
Chris Hanretty (St. Anne’s) stood and was unopposed.

Part-Time VP (Graduates):
Siobhan mentioned that she is leaving tomorrow, and so we need to elect someone from PGA to go to the most important University Committees (University Council, EPSC).

There was a short debate on the decision to have a part-time VP (Graduates), and who might run for the full-time position later on in the year.

Julian (MCR President of St Antony’s) was nominated by Daniel Russell (St Antony’s) and was elected.

Motions:

Siobhan spoke of her frustration at not being able to do her job properly. She was going to write an amendment to the Constitution, but realised that Constitutional amendment would take two readings at Termly Council, and that she wanted to start debate now.

There was then a procedural motion to deal with motion (g) onwards.
Motion (g): Teaching Assistantships
Amendment: “Furthermore, tutors…” was deleted.
Siobhan wanted to know whether there should be more graduate teaching, or whether the Teaching Assistantships scheme was fine.
Tom Packer (St. X) said that it would be worth expressing some reservations.
Amendment: (3): “This Assembly believes that graduate teaching opportunities should be created and spread to a wide pool of candidates, and that any GTA scheme should take this into account”.
Siobhan mentioned that the scheme was partly designed to increase retention of British students, but that she thought that these GTAs shouldn’t just go to British students who have come through the tutorial system.
Julian (CCC) and Ruth Smith (Somerville) mentioned that the training element of the GTA should be stressed; on-the-job learning is not always desirable or useful.

Motion (h): College Allocation
There was strong agreement that this scheme might not really work.
Item 2, “assigning” amended to read “automatically assigning”
Item 3 amended to read “Resolves to oppose this”
The motion was passed nem con.

Motion (i): Fourth Year Fees
Siobhan mentioned that the prediction of a maximum of £1.6m revenue from this scheme is based on the most optimistic assumptions about current student numbers being maintained and current levels of payment.
Item 1, “the university continues to bicker about” amended to read “the University is unresolved about the issue of”
Item 2, first sentence deleted.
Item 2, “income generated will” amended to “income generated may”
Item 2, “retain academic credibility as an institution” to “remain attractive to the very best students”.
Item 3, “recognising… lost” deleted.
Ruth Smith ( ) noted that science divisions were already moving to take four years’ worth of fees, but that there was confusion over the current system.
There was debate over the appropriate level for the bursary – college, department or university.
“This eliminates the competitive advantage for Oxford as compared to other first tier academic institutions in the United Kingdom and loses the potential marketing advantage”.


Motion (j): Charities in OUSU
Item 1: delete “despite intense competition from the Tsunami appeal and from Student Union-run club nights”.
Item 3:    “unalloyed” amended to read “full”
Item 3: amended to also read “encourage graduate students to actively participate in Rag”

Motion (k): Staff in OUSU
Motion passed nem con.

Procedural motion to move for motions F, D, E and C in that order.

Item 1, para. 1 deleted
Resolves 3 deleted.

ß Day to day OUSU administration is suffering due to a number reasons, among which:

Problems in discussion:     OUSU website;
Bex (VP-Women) asked how the consulting project would work.
Justin Roffey answered that, as part of the MBA project, there is a summer consultancy project, and that he and many of his colleagues would like to give something back to the University.
Daniel Russell (St. Antony’s) spoke of his experience of just such a review, and the use it could bring.

Tani Mauriello (St. Hilda’s) voiced concern about misunderstanding OUSU; that it resembled many NGOs and charity organisations she had worked for, and might not be suited to review by MBA students.


Procedural motion to move to motion (l): (not on agenda)
Tom Packer (St. X) spoke in favour of his motion, of eliminating the requirement that candidates for office obtain permission.
Tom Packer: University should encourage supervisors to approve graduate students who wish to run for VP-Grad.

Julian Brown: Does the University or OUSU require supervisor approval?

Bex Wilkinson: University won’t approve OUSU constitution unless we require approval by supervisors.

Tom Packer: The motion requires that we use bodies such as the JCC to push for easier approval to run for VP-Grad and easier to suspend student status.

(The meeting becomes inquorate.)

Ruth Smith: What’s the point of the motion?

Tom Packer: Allow more people to run, allow successful candidates to keep their jobs.

Bex Wilkinson: This change should not be limited to VP-Grad, but postgraduate candidates to all sabbatical positions. There are postgrads who want to run for VP-Women and there’s nothing that prevents them from doing that.

Amended motion to reflect Bex’s suggestions

Julian Brown: Even if supervisors can’t formally oppose, may negatively affect relationship between them and students

Bex Wilkinson: My tutor was not aware that I was elected VP-Women

Siobhan McAndrew: My supervisor was unclear about OUSU VP role.

Siobhan McAndrew: There are several postgraduates interested in running for VP. Elections or co-opt? Why not co-opt?

Tom Packer: Wary about loss of democracy in student representation. No required permission will get more candidates.

Bex Wilkinson: Passing that through University may not happen.

Daniel Russell: I’m for less regulation.

Bex Wilkinson: I never read the constitution after working for OUSU for three years as delegate, exec and VP.

Daniel Russell: What do we do if no one runs for the position for next six months? Co-opt?

Tani Mauriello: What’s the difference between Tom’s motion and Siobhan’s motions?

Tom Packer: My motion is to allow people to access the current system.
Daniel Russell: Would like more discussion in future PGA. Siobhan created good momentum and the rest of us will carry on the discussion. We should not pass these motions.

Meeting is now quorate.

Daniel Russell read out the motion for review of OUSU by MBA students.

Motion passed nem con.

Tom Packer: move my motion, with “candidates for VP-Grad” changed to graduate candidates for sabs positions.

Motion passed nem con.

Daniel Russell: Can we pass motions D, E, and C?

Bex Wilkinson: Motion D concerns budget for the graduate campaign, but there is no money in the OUSU budget.

Daniel Russell: We suggest more money in the next budget.

Motions C, D, E passed nem con.

Siobhan: MCR Presidents Lunch with Chair of Graduate Panel of Conference of Colleges.

Daniel Russell: Move to thank Siobhan’s excellent service as VP-Graduates

Motion passed nem con.

Julian Brown: Move to thank Bex and Ian for coming to PGA

Motion passed nem con.