14th November (Issue 1238) - The Courier

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4 THE COURIER Monday November 14 2011newsProtestors crash Vice-Chancellor lecture“Dificult” questionsput to VC at publictalk on fairnessElliot BentleyDeputy EditorA public lecture on the subject of ‘fairness’given by the Vice-Chancellor ofNewcastle University was disruptedlast week as a group of students usedthe event to attempt to publicly humiliatethe VC.Members of the anti-fees and anticutsstudent group, Newcastle FreeEducation Network, arrived at thetalk with placards and lyers accusingVice-Chancellor Chris Brink of“leech[ing] off the University”. Thetalk was hosted as part of the Radio3 Free Thinking Festival at the Sage,and focused on Brink’s role as chair ofthe newly formed ‘Fairness Commission’.Newcastle Free Education Network(NFEN) last year occupied the FineArts building in protest of the University’sstance on tuition fees. Theoccupation ended after 17 days whenthe University threatened studentsinvolved with legal and disciplinaryaction.A Facebook event listed on thegroup’s oficial oficial oficial page stated thatBrink, who grew up and studied inSouth Africa during Apartheid, had“no right to lecture us on fairness”and encouraged students to “[ex-press] their disgust at his scandalousabuse of position”. Brink was formelyVice-Chancellor at Stellenbosch Uni-versity where he led a transformationagenda.Jennifer Stott, a third-year Geogra-phy student present at the talk, toldThe Courier that tensions were highfrom the very beginning. A group ofstudents entered carrying placardsthat read ‘Newcastle Free EducationNetwork’, were swiftly asked by theorganisers to set them down.The group remained quiet for thecourse of the talk, but raised theirhands to ask questions afterwards.According to Stott, BBC presenterJuliet Gardiner, who was chairing thetalk, then avoided picking any mem-bers of the group until urged to by anunrelated member of the audience.Regarding the Vice-Chancellor’s answers,Stott told The Courier that shethought Brink did appear to be listeningto the group’s questions, but describedthem as “dificult to answer”.Pete Campbell, a member of NFENpresent at the event, told The Courierthat he thought it was “naïve of theBBC to not expect [critical] studentsto turn up”, and that he “didn’t thinkthey handled it very well”. Campbellwas also left unsatisied by theVice-Chancellor’s answers: “[Brink]answered lots of the questions bysaying, ‘my statements about this areonline already’”.Once the Q&A session ended, thegroup stood up to reveal that theyhad written the message “Is he reallyfair?” across their backs for the audiencebehind them to see. The Vice-Chancellor then spent half an hourspeaking offstage to the protestersin person, which Campbell said was“appreciated”, but that they “weren’tentirely happy with the answers”.Flyers handed out by the groupbefore the speech, entitled ‘Whyare we here?’, included claims thatBrink “supported the indings of theBrowne review and lobbied for theremoval of the cap on tuition fees”.This is not strictly true, since theFliers given out byprotestors before thelecture, which werecriticised as being“inaccurate andinfl ammatory” by theUniversity.Vice-Chancellor made apublic speech in Novemberlast year at the EqualityChallenge Unit annualconference, accusing thegovernment of “consciously and deliberatelydisinvesting from highereducation” and “creating an incentivefor its young people to leave”.“At the time, he was siding with theRussell group,” responded Campbell.“It’s in the last year that his tune haschanged.” The lyers also misreportedigures revealed by The Courier lastyear relating to the Vice-Chancellor’sexpenses. They concluded: “All thisadds up to a man who has no rightto lecture us on fairness. While goingabout his day job, he leeches off theUniversity, which has until now beenfunded by the tax payer and the University’sstudents.”A University spokesperson, who describedthe lyers as “inaccurate andinlammatory”, said: “The main focusof Professor Brink’s talk was to outlinea set of principles that have beendeveloped by the [Fairness] Commissionto ensure that important decisionsaffecting people right across thecity are made in a fair way.“It is a pity, therefore, that a fewNewcastle University students usedthis as an opportunity to make a verypersonal attack on the Vice-Chancellor.”Campbell told The Courier that hedidn’t think of the protest as personal,responding: “I don’t think it’s rightthat the Vice-Chancellor is using myfees in this way. It was an attack onpeople in power abusing that privilege.”When asked what he thoughtthe Free Education Network’s actionshad achieved, Campbell said: “I thinkAbove: A still from avideo taken by one of theprotestors when speakingto Vice-Chancellor ChrisBrink (left). Below:Members of NewcastleFree Education Networkdrape a banner overa balcony in the Sage.Photography: Gabe Masonwe highlighted to the audience thehypocrisy of giving a talk on fairnesswhile earning a six-igure salary.“It’s important that a public igureis held to account for their words,”he added. “We wanted to let the Vice-Chancellor know that the issue hasn’tgone away.”
THE COURIER Monday November 14 2011 5newsStudents protestin capital for firsttime since MarchBeth StauntonPolitics CorrespondentA coach of Newcastle and Northumbriastudents made its way to Londonlast Wednesday for the first studentdemonstration of this academic year.The march went relatively troublefree,with over 20 arrests being madeby 4,000 police officers on duty.Estimates have varied regardingthe number of protesters out on thestreets, with the organisers sayingbetween 10,000 and 15,000, whilethe police put it closer to 2,000.4000The amount of police officers on duty duringthe march in LondonThe march was organised by theNational Campaign Against Fees andCuts and supported by the NUS. Althoughthe vote for £9,000 tuition feeswas passed last year, despite a 50,000strong student protest and universityoccupations across the country, manystudents remain resistant to the government’seducation policies.Katy Hargreaves, Welfare andEquality Officer, organised transportto the demonstration and believesthat it’s still worth protesting. “Theoutcomes of the white paper have nostudent benefits and will result in studentspaying much more money to receivea lower standard of education,”she said. “Protests are so important;doing nothing does nothing! They area catalyst for local action and moreawareness, eventually resulting inchange.”The police, most in full riot gear,were intent on keeping a tight controlof the crowds. They closed off sidestreets around London to avoid breakaway groups and keep the protest inone place.Third-year Gabe Mason said that“The march was largely uneventfuland quiet. The most defining thingof the march is how much the policehave changed their tactics. They nowcontrol the march in a much stricterway, outnumbering protesters.”The protest was directed awayfrom passing the occupation outsideSt Paul’s, and electricians who hadgone on strike were prevented fromjoining the march. Police had warnedprotesters previous to the demonstrationthat they were prepared toshoot rubber bullets, which is saidto have dissuaded many young peoplefrom attending. However, despitea few scuffles, generally the protestpassed off peacefully.Second-year students Martha Taylor-Roweand Ruby Smith felt theday had gone well commenting, “Wecame last year and got a buzz from it,and we’re still really angry about tuitionfees. It was a good day, and quiteserious. People are really passionateabout these issues.”“Instead of workingin the protesters’favour, many fearit will have theopposite effect.”Tessa Tyler ToddCommentaryIn 1990, 200,000 people protestedagainst the poll tax, in 2002 close to2 million protested against the warwith Iraq and in 2010 over 50,000protested against the rise in tuitionfees. On Wednesday thousands moreadded their voices to the ongoing tuitionfee campaign; but will it make adifference or will it go down in historywith one of the others, where thepeople spoke and the governmentdidn’t listen?As with the poll tax protests of1990 these protests are happeningunder an already unpopular government.The Liberal Democrats, whoonce pledged to not increase tuitionfees, went back on their word.Furthermore with the huge cuts theCoalition government have had tomake, the Conservatives and LiberalDemocrats are doing badly inthe polls. Instead of working in theprotesters’ favour, many fear it willhave the opposite effect. It is lookingincreasingly likely that the LiberalDemocrats will not be in poweragain for a considerable time, and ina move to stay in power for as longas possible they will carry on puttingforward different policies dueto the “compromises of the CoalitionGovernment” for as long as possible.This sadly means that no matter howmany people protest we are unlikelyto see a change in policy from thisgovernment.In 2002, millions marched againstThe majority of peopleat the protests werestudents marching againstthe recent white paperon higher educationPhotography: Sam Tysonthe war in Iraq, not just here in theUK but across the world and evenfrom this, the largest protest seen inliving memory, we saw no change ingovernment policy. The only resultof such marches was the public becomingmore and more disillusionedwith those supposed to representthem.Looking back over past protests,and seeing no direct change in Governmentpolicy from any of them,leads us to question the effectivenessof marches as a protest. Sureit provides a voice, but it also providesus with scenes of violence, ofincreased police presence, and mostimportantly, it provides us withmass frustration at being ignored.Many say the riots over the summerwere the result of people feeling thatthe government doesn’t care and allthese marches do is highlight that.Yes it’s great giving people a voice,but what use is a voice when thosewho can change things choose not to“In general, protestmovements are...actions of aminority.”David HiscocksCommentaryOn Wednesday November 9, thousandsof students from acrossthe country protested in Londonagainst planned education cuts.They are following in the footstepsof the Chartists of 1848 who wereamongst the first British protestersof a democratic nature; to the morerecent protesters against the Iraqwar. It is a sign of a healthy democraticsystem that it can absorb andcope with such dissent.Indeed, without the ability, nor thedesire to protest, democracy cannotexist. A democratic system isbuilt upon the ability to peacefullyvoice one’s opinion, even if one isin the minority, without fear of governmentrepression. Although theGovernment was criticised for itsuse of controversial police tacticssuch as ‘kettling’ in reaction to lastyear’s student march, in general,British governments have been admirablefor their ability to cope relativelywell with dissent. Accordingto BBC News Middle East, this is inmarked contrast to the current situationin Syria where ‘opposition isrepressed’.By protesting, dissenters are displayingto the ruling governmentthat contrary opinions do exist thatthey should be aware of. It is for theright to ‘freedom of expression’ thatwe saw citizens throughout the MiddleEast rise up in the ‘Arab Spring’.Therefore, on this basis, we can applaudall those going down to protestin London as they are fulfillinga vital democratic role, exhibiting acontrary aspect of public opinion.However, there is a problem. Ingeneral, protest movements are, bytheir very nature, actions of a minoritybecause the Government hasto act with the support, or at leastapathetic resignation, of the majority.On Wednesday, the majority ofprotesters were students, or youngpotential students.A sign of a strong democratic governmentis to enact the will of themajority, and resist the ‘tyranny ofthe minority’. Unfortunately for thestudents protesting, it appears thatpublic opinion is remarkably apatheticin regards to education cuts.Therefore, the government has noreason to pay any attention to studentdemands as they are acting asa minority group.This does not mean that studentsand other minority groups who havegrievances they wish to air shouldbe dissuaded by the difficulty of gettingtheir opinions acted upon. Farfrom it. They should protest. Theyshould voice their dissent. But thestudent protesters are unlikely toachieve real change, due to the verysystem of government that allowsthem the opportunity to protest.
Page 1 and 2: THECOURIERThe Independent Voice Of
Page 3: THE COURIER Monday November 14 2011
Page 7 and 8: THE COURIER Monday November 14 2011
Page 9 and 10: Comment CommentTHE COURIER Monday N
Page 13 and 14: Taking a walk with the ParkMusic ma
Page 37 and 38: Sportthecourieronline.co.uk/sportTH
Page 39: THE COURIER Monday November 14 2011
Page 42 and 43: 42 THE COURIER Monday November 14 2
Page 48: Sportthecourieronline.co.uk/sport48

14th November (Issue 1238) - The Courier

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?