Students to demonstrate nationwide against police brutality

Image credit: The Guardian

Students across the country have called for a national day of action in response to claims of brutal measures taken by police forces to quell recent student protests.

A Facebook event by the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts, entitled ‘#copsoffcampus: NATIONAL DAY OF ACTION’ encourages students to take action tomorrow in response to calls from groups nationwide. The event description states that recent levels of violence in police responses to student protests “cannot be allowed to continue”, calling for “urgent solidarity” amongst students.

This call for action follows multiple claims in recent days of police brutality towards student protesters. On Wednesday December 4, five people were arrested after students occupied rooms in Senate House in protest against plans to close the University of London Union (ULU). Despite claims by students that the protest was peaceful, one unnamed participant stated that many protesters were “crushed and hit as police lashed out, punching students and pulling their hair and clothes.” A video appearing to show a policeman punching a student demonstrator has also emerged.

However, Chris Cobb, the chief operating officer of the University of London responded to claims of brutality, asserting that “invading our working environment and blocking fire escapes is potentially life threatening and plays no part in democratic dissent,” while a spokesperson for the Metropolitan police urged anyone with concerns about officers’ actions to “call 101 and report them.”

Violence continued on Thursday 5^th December, as students clashed with police during a “Cops off Campus” demonstration protesting against police presence on university campuses. In response to the alleged violence on Wednesday night, the protest saw 200 to 300 students gathering outside the University of London Union (ULU), 36 of whom were arrested, with others reportedly kettled by police.

ULU president Michael Chessum described an “angry” and “vibrant” atmosphere, adding: “I think there’s a spark in the student movement I haven’t seen since 2011. I think that people are just going to keep coming back.”

Outside London, recent demonstrations at Sussex University have led to the indefinite exclusion of five students, provoking dismay among activists nationwide. The students had been participating in an occupation protesting against the alleged “marketisation of higher education”.

Despite voluntarily leaving the occupied buildings after an injunction was sought against them, the students were later suspended for acting as “a potential hazard to sustaining the university’s policies on health and safety”.

Labour MP for Hayes and Harlington John McDonnell has however expressed support for the students, stating: “It’s outrageous that students exercising their traditional democratic right to protest have been persecuted in this way”. A petition which gained 4,291 signatures in under 24 hours called for the retraction of this suspension, described by one of the protesters Michael Segalov as “an attack on the right to protest and freedom of speech”.

John Duffy, the registrar at Sussex, defended the suspensions, suggesting a need to “make it clear that activities that seriously disrupt our campus community will carry consequences.”

#copsoffcampus has called for students to “mobilise harder” and fight to uphold the notion of “an education that is public and democratic, free for all”. Demonstrations have been planned at ULU, with students who cannot make it to London being encouraged to take action within their own campuses.

Exeter students will have the opportunity to visit a stall in the Forum from 12pm, raising awareness of the alleged violations of democratic rights.

In addition, an event in Queens building at 7pm tomorrow – which will include “free live music, short films, poetry and possibly food” – aims to encourage Exeter students to show solidarity with protests nationwide, described as “an issue that affects all of us.”

Hannah Butler, News Team

Follow @ExeposeNews on Twitter and like us here on Facebook

EDL: Don't Play Into Their Hands

With the EDL marching in the city on Saturday, Bryan Toh argues that we should just ignore them and not provide them with fuel for future protests.

“I say don’t give the EDL what it wants; instead, just ignore them. Some might call it meek, but I believe it is simply the more efficient way to deal with such groups.”
Photo Credit: West Midlands Police via Compfight cc

Despite the good intentions of Exeter Together and my disdain for the EDL’s anti-Islamic sentiment, I am unsure if holding a march against the EDL’s own is the most productive way to express opposition to the controversial group. Religion can polarise opinion, but in a multicultural, modern and tolerant society like the United Kingdom, it is rare to hear extremist views like the EDL’s on these issues.

To me, organising a march against them gives them the attention they crave. It draws the limelight onto them, and gives them a platform to shout out their message of hate, which would otherwise be nothing but a whisper. This not only risks putting more people in distress, but also increases the chances of someone hearing, and getting misled by the EDL’s message.

As with any two opposing protests, tensions will run high. Should any sort of violence erupt between the EDL and Exeter Together, it will again just be playing into the EDL’s hands and providing them with fodder for future protests.  Additionally, a counter-demonstration is unlikely to deter a group as convinced of its message as the EDL. They will most likely proceed as planned, trumpeting their right to do so under the law.

Don’t give the EDL what it wants; instead, just ignore them. Some might call it meek, but I believe it is simply the most efficient way to deal with such groups. By showing via our everyday actions that Exeter is a community that celebrates diversity, and ignoring the noise made by the EDL, we send a strong message that their skewed beliefs have no place among us. Should they decide to push certain boundaries in seeking attention, I have faith that the local authorities will react appropriately.

Having been privileged enough to grow up in a culturally inclusive country like Singapore, and then study in another, I am all for religious equality and so give Exeter Together my full backing. I just feel that giving the EDL the cold shoulder would be an easier and more effective approach.

Bryan Toh

Is Bryan right or should we stand up against the EDL? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter@CommentExepose.

EDL: Why We Should Counter March

With the EDL coming to town on Saturday, Joshua Mines argues in favour of the Exeter Together demonstration.

I doubt there will be many reading this who need much persuading about the reasons why we should disagree with the EDL; an organisation known for aggressive xenophobia and racism. A party, so radical, that their own founder Tommy Robinson recently resigned because, “He recognised the dangers of far right extremism”. The EDL, even for him, had gone too far.

I believe in protest, and I believe in diversity as an integral part of modern Britain. “We all have a voice, and on the 16 November we have the chance to shout to the country, to Exeter, and to ourselves, what we believe in.”
Photo Credit: David Holt London via Compfight cc

The unfortunate fact of democracy is that they are still well within their rights to protest peacefully, which they intend to put into practice soon. However, it’s also a right we own and one that I feel every student, or more broadly every rationally minded person, should uphold.

Protest puts into action the ideas that are on everyone’s mind, and gives weight to the words that are on everyone’s lips behind closed doors. An opportunity for the EDL to take to the streets and get red in the face is equally an opportunity for everyone else to show the EDL up for what they are: a minority, a small amount of closed-minded, angry people venting their blaze of rage and bullying a section of society they see as lesser than themselves. Showing up in number will show the country and any far-right sympathisers that the majority of of Exeter, the University and the town disagrees with this venomous way of thinking and that we will stand up for the multinational heritage that has existed for years and continues to thrive in our city.

Though counter-protest is more likely to draw the eye to Exeter, and thus to the EDL’s activities, this is an opportunity we should embrace. More attention again offers us a chance to show that in Exeter, acceptance and diversity will always prevail over hate and discrimination.

What I’m peddling may sound cheesy, and in a time when UKIP boast higher numbers in the opinion polls than the Liberal Democrats it may sound as if I’m undermining the growth of far right ideas in this tough economic climate. Regardless of these conditions, morals and values stay the same and we should strive to uphold them.

I believe in protest, and I believe in diversity as an integral part of modern Britain. We all have a voice, and on Saturday we have the chance to shout to the country, to Exeter, and to ourselves, what we believe in.

Joshua Mines 

Is counter marching the best option? Wouldn’t it be better just to ignore the EDL? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.

The Grass is always Greener…An Interview with Green party leader Natalie Bennett

Image credits: Niklas Rahmel

With Natalie Bennett, leader of the Green Party, making an appearance on Streatham Campus, Features Editors James Roberts and Imogen Watson talked to her about fracking, Australia and being a woman in politics. Scroll to the bottom to see the video interview in collaboration with XTV Online.

It’s a quiet Saturday afternoon and the Green Party are taking over campus. Natalie Bennett has shale gas on her mind, and is preparing to introduce a video starting Exeter’s fightback against fracking. “We’re on the path to catastrophic climate change,” Bennett explains with an urgency rarely seen outside the Green Party, “we have to leave at least half of our fossil fuels in the ground.” No doubt, Natalie Bennett is on a mission that’s far bigger than Queens LT1.

Bennett arrives early for our interview. Our unnecessary large and unthinkably excitable XTV camera crew are still hurriedly scurrying around with cables and lenses, yet Bennett seems utterly unphased. “If you think this is bad, you should try being in a BBC studio,” she says warmly, before beginning some gentle politician’s patter about our respective degree courses and her own experiences as a journalist and civil servant in Thailand. “I couldn’t speak to most people there,” she jokes, “I had to get into taxis with something written down and hope for the best.”

The first thing that strikes you when meeting the leader of Britain’s fifth largest party is her Australian accent. “My accent is classless,” Bennett explains, “it’s quite useful really.” She was born in Sydney, and worked for many years on provincial Australian newspapers before her big break in Bangkok. Was it in the Australian bush that she was first bitten by the political bug, we ask? “Australian country politics is mainly conservatives, and people who think conservatives are soft and wussy and not good enough on the death penalty. There wasn’t much politics to be involved with,” Bennett answers with a chuckle. She is surprisingly adamant about her own real world credentials for a civil servant-turned-journalist-turned-politician, perhaps aware of the particular public wrath reserved for the cloistered and the careerist. “I joined the Green Party on 1 January 2006,” she recounts with an intriguing mix of precision and surprise, “seven years later, here I am, leader of the Green Party!” Despite her genuine warmth, Bennett is clearly a cool political operator in British Green politics.

Currently the only female party leader in Britain, Bennett has a lot to say about the role of women in politics, explaining that her “first politics is feminism.” She is worried that, in 2013, women do not have enough of a role in decision making at the top tables. “There are very few women making decisions which run the country, outside Theresa May,” she points out with no small dose of exasperation, “and I think that really is a problem.” Bennett is acutely aware that her election as leader marked “the first time a woman leader had taken over from another woman leader in British political history.” Will she be handing over to another female party leader when she leaves office? For the time being, Bennett is committed to both running for a parliamentary seat and remaining as leader, unlike her predecessor and Exeter alumna Caroline Lucas, MP for Brighton Pavilion. “The seat I’m likely to stand in is in London,” says Bennett assuredly, “and it’s no more than twenty minutes from the Millbank studios of the BBC and Sky, so it’s quite handy.”

Presumably then, we can expect to see much more of Natalie Bennett on our television screens; much like Caroline Lucas herself, who was recently arrested at a protest against fracking in Balcombe. Bennett is startlingly forthright about the prospect of her party’s foremost eco-champion appearing in court. “The Green Party has always believed that sometimes non-violent direction action is an essential step because people just don’t hear otherwise,” Bennett states with rehearsed certainty. With an impish smile and knowing glance, she adds, “we were getting a lot more attention after she was arrested.” Clearly, then, despite her ambition to become a London MP, an attachment to the established political process has yet to manifest itself.

At the same time, Natalie Bennett seems both encouraged and off put by the recent success of their friends on the fringe, UKIP. “You can understand a number of reasons why UKIP is attractive,” she says, though quickly pointing out the considerable ideological differences between them, “a lot of [their supporters] just look back to some golden age of the 1950s that they think existed, and would like to go there.” Are there similarities between these two very different maverick movements? “A lot of UKIP voters are disillusioned Tories who think that the Tories are horribly incompetent in government,” Bennett explains, adding, “Which is true.” Beyond this, and the somewhat mischievous tendencies of their party leaders, one cannot help but feel that Bennett sees little else in common. On the attack, she deplores that “UKIP has what sounds like a superficially simple message that looks attractive to some people: if we just got out of the EU and stop immigration, everything would be wonderful, sweetness and light.” Her contempt for their policies seems as clear as her jealousy of their performance. Green with envy, indeed.

Caroline Lucas, Bennett’s predecessor.
Image credits: Robin Hood Tax

How then will the Green Party catapult themselves to a main part on the national stage? For Bennett, who spent much of her time as an understudy to Caroline Lucas’ rise to stardom, success lies in proving “the Green Party is more than an environmental party.” Policies like the campaign for a living wage, which recently attracted attention here on campus, form the basis of her drive to “absolutely change direction” in Britain. “We need to create jobs you can build a life on,” Bennett passionately pronounces, “and live within the limits of the one planet.” While these policies have yet to infiltrate politics proper, Bennett clearly seeing universities as a good place to start: “and the one that I always mention in universities: we believe in zero tuition fees.” Apparently, with a new Green Society on campus, Exeter maybe poised for its own Green revolution.

So what’s ahead for the Green Party in the 2015 election? “Brighton Pavilion did it, and any seat in the country could do it too,” Bennett prophesises. Change in the political climate or not, after 2015, the grass may be Greener on the other side.

James Roberts, Features Editor

Interviewed by James Roberts, Features Editor and Imogen Watson, Online Features Editor

The Faults and Flaws of British Police

Online News Editor Harrison Jones discusses and highlights the violent and corrupt side of the police force in Britain.

After US police officers were filmed brutally beating a father of four shortly before his death,  it is easy to dismiss foreign policing tactics as alien.

But as an unprecedented demonstration to Defend London’s NHS  looks set to go ahead on May 18th, the actions of British police, particularly at protests, needs to be scrutinised.

Image Credits- The Guardian

The right to protest has been a central pillar of our democracy for centuries. But before we dismiss the actions of foreign authorities as barbaric, it should be noted that Britain is no stranger to police brutality.

At least 1,433 people have died in UK police custody since 1990. No police have ever been convicted.

The same justice system sentenced Nicolas Robinson to 6 months in jail for stealing a bottle of water.

When spelt out so bluntly, such hypocrisy makes an absolute mockery of our judicial system.

Britain’s cosy view of it’s police force has rightly taken a hit in recent years, especially after the Leveson enquiry revealed widespread corruption, particularly amongst the Metropolitan police.

Make no mistake, the service provided is essential and their comparatively good performance deserves respect, but that does not mean they can use disproportionate force, as in the cases of Alfie Meadows, Ian Tomlinson and Charles de Menezes.

People have long suggested that because footballers are paid such ridiculous salaries they should be able to put up with the occasional insult – it’s part of their job, they claim. Yet this defence is turned upon it’s head when the police are involved. Since they have to endure some abuse (which – granted – is often unnecessary), their tactics are apparently justifiable. If that claim had any consistency, then Eric Cantona’s infamous attack on a fan would be seen as acceptable. The truth is there is no difference: insults do not warrant retaliation, professionalism should be expected.

In recent years, the police have taken to ‘kettling’ protestors. They know full well it rightly enrages crowds, illegally detaining them in all but name and inciting violence, which they then pre-empt and clamp down inappropriately.

There is no excuse for this sort of brutality. Police might occasionally face violence from a small minority of protestors, but when their primary job is citizen protection, battering them – often unarmed – is an outrageous misuse of power and another unwanted relic of Thatcherism.

This behaviour also discourages attendance at demonstrations, meaning there are less protestors and the cause is given less attention, adding to the frustration of the people exercising a democratic right. It’s a cycle detracting from the very spirit of our political system.

More worrying is the recent news of undercover police infiltrating peaceful protestors. It only takes one small step further for them to incite violence in an effort to discredit protests. Such agent provocateurs still exist globally, but if proven to be operational in Britain that really would be a despicable stain upon our democracy.

Questions remain unanswered about the shooting of Mark Duggan and in an age when police behaviour is often swept under the carpet, it is imperative that the service is transparent. But the recent move towards less experienced, populist police commissioners only adds to the unlikeliness of this eventuality.

For too long police behaviour has gone unnoticed and it is time that media coverage highlighted British shortcomings. For as long as it remains hushed up – or seemingly acceptable compared to America – it will continue.

Harrison Jones, Online News Editor

Banning The Sun: Comment on the Referendum

With The Sun’s availability on campus being threatened by the imminent Guild referendum, Exeposé Comment looks at the arguments made for and against removing The Sun from Guild outlets and leaning on other campus stockists until the pictures of topless women are removed from page 3.

Across UK universities, removing The Sun from sale seems to be becoming a popular method of protesting sexism and misogyny in the media. A ferocious campaign led by No More Page 3 has seen the paper removed in a number of universities including LSE, Edinburgh and Dundee. They have also secured over 100,000 signatures in a petition to Dominic Mohan, the editor of The Sun, to, “drop the bare boobs from the newspaper.” With the referendum by the Guild underway this week led by the Vote Yes to boycotting The Sun on campus! group, some have seen the vote as an inappropriate attempt to limit our freedom of speech, while others still regard the issue as one of the objectification of women as mere voiceless sex objects.

“At its core, the issue concerns the naked breasts present in every issue of The Sun, and the harm that this does to gender equality.”
Photo Credit: Niklas Rahmel

Rachel Brown, former President of Exeter Gender Equality Society argues that, “If you want to buy The Sun, you can go to another newsagents which is no hardship. The Guild ban is about effective campaigning and the referendum makes it a fair process. It sends a clear message that we expect The Sun to ditch their patronising, sexualised representation of women.” Those in favour of banning The Sun are keen to point out that the move is designed to withdraw support for the newspaper from the Guild, and not to dictate people’s reading habits. At its core, the issue concerns the naked breasts present in many issues of The Sun, and the harm that this does to gender equality. No More Page 3’s open letter petition highlights that, “George Alagiah doesn’t say, ‘And now let’s look at Courtney, 21, from Warrington’s bare breasts,’ in the middle of the 6 O’ Clock News, does he, Dominic?… No, they don’t. There would be an outcry.”

It makes sense to say that Page Three Girls are an outdated and misogynistic addition to our printed media, but does that really mean that we should remove the UK’s most widely read publication from campus?

Rob Price, one of those heading the “Vote No to banning The Sun from Guild Shops” group, comments that,” We are not defending Page 3, but rather the spirit of open debate in the student body. The YES campaign can achieve nothing, because The Guild has no jurisdiction over the marketplace, the only stockist of The Sun of campus – but a victory would nonetheless be an attempt to restrict access to material that you disagree with for others, and that is the essence of censorship. So whilst freedom of choice will not actually be infringed, the motion is nonetheless an attempt to do so, and it is on these grounds that we oppose it.”

Freedom of expression is obviously something that should protected, but to what extent and when does protecting one group’s right to  expression results in the persecution of another? For many, it is the case that it is no one’s right to, and the media’s responsibility not to, objectify and over-sexualise a woman in any way. Christopher Fear wrote in the Vote No group, “[The Yes Campaign] is small-minded, parochial, embarrassing, practically ineffective and, as a purely symbolic act, a distraction from the concrete interests of gender equality.”

In Exeposé Comment‘s most responded to Facebook poll to date, 76% voted that The Sun should not be removed from all University campus outlets. Obviously this result comes from a significantly smaller sample size than the referendum being held by the Guild will be subject to, but it does perhaps give a feel for the sentiments of the student population in Exeter.

Of those who responded to the poll, it should come as no surprise that the majority of people who wished to see The Sun banned were women, while the overwhelming majority of those wishing to keep The Sun on our shelves were men. That is not to say that only a woman could have any interest in the promotion of gender equality, however it’s reasonable to suggest that in this situation the female population at the University of Exeter has a more tangible, immediate interest in the issue.

While we believe that The Sun promotes a view of women that is derogatory at best while being neither true or relevant in modern society, there is a fine line to tread between the noble pursuit of equality for all and falling into the trap of enveloping censorship. By no means do we think that this referendum will be the beginning of a slippery slope to overbearing Guild influence, but it does perhaps set a precedent for any and all matters of offence to result in campus-wide reform.

James Bennett and Dave Reynolds, Online Comment Editors

For further argument from both sides read Virginia Walsh’s Banning The Sun: Boobs Aren’t News and Harry Chamberlain’s Banning The Sun: Nothing Short of Censorship.  Do you find The Sun’s depiction of women sexist or misogynistic? Is banning the paper the appropriate way of protesting their content? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.

Students in May Day meeting over University privatisation

Ledys Mejia (right) discusses the impact of neoliberalism on education
Image credit: Niklas Rahmel

Students are gathering on campus this evening to discuss their views on privatisation at the University, in a public meeting designed to coincide with International Workers Day.

Just over 20 people have been meeting since 6pm in Lecture Theatre Two in Queen’s building, with three speakers discussing various topics and a draft campaign statement being decided.

Queen’s Cafe was originally the chosen location but due to poor availability on May Day it was decided that the nearby lecture theatre should be used instead. The cafe was seen as a poignant place to gather after it was deemed unprofitable at the end of the last academic year and closed, before reopening with several new vending machines.

Exeter Socialist Students, making up the bulk of the audience, are keen to highlight a diverse range of issues, from private companies becoming more prevalent on campus, to the impact of accommodation costs on international students.

In a comment piece written for Exeposé today, Carlus Hudson, who is speaking at the ongoing event alongside Quen Took and Ledys Mejia, writes:

“The provision of housing to students, both on and off campus, is for profit and largely in the hands of private landlords. Maintenance loans are sometimes barely sufficient to cover the cheaper end of accommodation available, meaning there is simply not enough affordable student housing to go around.”

The group have been angered by what they see as “piece meal reforms,” citing the end of cheap and affordable services and the rise of profit hungry corporations as serious cause for concern.

Amidst anger over the rising costs of accommodation and tripling of tuition fees, the students also suggest the University should not be run for profit, and serve “students not the market.”

But geography student Zoe Sturgess is surprised by the students’ protest and has no problem with private companies being allowed on campus. “I actually think we should have more private shops at the University, Costa provides a valuable service and something like a Tesco Express would be really convenient.”

There was concern that the meeting may lower attendance at a similar demonstration on Saturday, arranged by the Exeter Anti-Cuts Alliance, but organisers remain hopeful of a larger turnout in four days time having publicised the Bedford Square rally at this evening’s meeting.

The last time two events of this ilk came in such quick succession was in 2010, shortly before the student occupation of Newman A began. Activists will be hoping this week’s proceedings can have a similar impact, as they look to continue their broad campaign against privatisation.

Harrison Jones, Online News Editor

Follow @ExeposeNews on Twitter and like us here on Facebook.

 

Is The University Prioritising Profit Over Student Welfare?

 In line with May Day’s protest over the rising cost of living for students and a perceived privatisation of the University of Exeter, keen activist Carlus Hudson delves deeper into the motivations behind the protest and points the finger of blame squarely between the private landlords of Exeter and the profit-driven mindset of the university. 

On Wednesday 1^st May, also International Workers’ Day, students in Exeter will be holding a demonstration in Queens LT2 at 6pm to challenge the on-going economic attacks on students. The tripled tuition fees introduced by the government have been implemented, meaning that students who started their courses this year and from now on will be landed with an extra £18,000 debt for a three year degree. International students have an even larger debt to pay because of going to university than that. While students are being weighed down in the long term by the increased debt burden (for the crime of wanting an education and being upwardly mobile), in the short term their standard of living is being targeted by an increase in student rents. The Students’ Guild have already taken action to freeze rents, but this should be extended to keep living costs low for students over the next few years.

“The provision of housing to students, both on and off campus, is for profit and largely in the hands of private landlords.”
Photo Credit: 401(K) 2013 via Compfight cc

The provision of housing to students, both on and off campus, is for profit and largely in the hands of private landlords. Maintenance loans are sometimes barely sufficient to cover the cheaper end of accommodation available, meaning there is simply not enough affordable student housing to go around. The demolition of old housing and the construction of new housing on campus itself largely caters to the higher end demographics. This means that not enough investment is being made into cheaper housing. This process is slowly making Exeter unaffordable to thousands of prospective and current students at Exeter. Student housing should not be to there to maximise the profits of the companies the contacts are outsources to, it should be run at cost by the university to make sure that high quality accommodation is available at a reasonable price.

A number of other services on campus have been shut down, including several of the cafes that operated on campus until the start of this academic year. This means that a number of staff have lost their jobs and those services have been centralised to the Forum, which damages the diversity of services available on campus as well as being detrimental to those who have been made redundant as a result.

Students are mobilising at Exeter University to fight these attacks, and pressure the university management to implement measures to reverse the changes that have taken place. The demonstration on 1^st May will be the start of a long-term campaign to achieve this, and this campaign will seek to organise the anger felt by many students on these issues.

Carlus Hudson

Editorial Note: This article claims that jobs were lost when cafes on campus were closed. To clarify this point, all staff affected by these closures were in fact offered alternative employment or a voluntary severance package.

Could the university be doing more to help ease the pressure of living on a student budget? Or is the cost of private housing really none of their concern? Leave a comment below or write to the Comment team at the Exeposé Comment Facebook Group or on Twitter @CommentExepose.

Protest on Tremough campus

A recent FX protest march through Falmouth. (photo: Flex)

Students and staff based on the Tremough campus are protesting against Falmouth University’s decision to transfer the contracts of 130 members of Academic and Support staff to a private company owned by Falmouth and the University of Exeter, known as FX Plus. This is the first time that a UK university has transferred its entire Student Support service to an external company.

The employees at the University, which gained full university status in December, work in a variety of student support roles, including Library and IT Services, academic skills assistants and disability support teams. Their new roles within FX Plus will mean that they are no longer entitled to receive pay in line with national standards, since university-owned subsidiaries such as FX Plus are allowed to operate outside these pay scales.

One member of staff at Falmouth, who did not wish to be named, told Times Higher Education that a librarian newly recruited to FX Plus could be paid as much as £5,000 a year less than staff moving over from Falmouth.

“That is a very significant amount when you are on the lower end of the pay scale,” she said.

In a statement on behalf of FXU (Falmouth and Exeter Students’ Union), Falmouth President Scott Pearson said: “We have been assured by both Falmouth University and Falmouth Exeter Plus that there will be no adverse effect on the delivery of services to students”, while FX Plus Chief Executive Niamh Lamond has assured staff that their contracts will not be altered.

Speaking to Flex, Falmouth University’s student newspaper, a member of the FX Protest who wished to remain anonymous said of FX Plus: “It’s not directly accountable to the students in the way a University is. Our concern is that it takes away that accountability.”

The falmouthexeterprotest website has also expressed concerns over the move, as staff will potentially be linked to regional pay scales in Cornwall, one of the poorest counties in England, rather than the national scales to which they were previously associated. They claim that the move will disadvantage students undertaking Higher Education in Cornwall, as they believe that a lower pay scale will reduce institutions’ capacities to attract the best applicants for their job roles.

The protestors have said on their website that “there has been no clear argument or evidence presented to us that demonstrate how [the outsourcing] will improve services. We know that no alternative models have been looked at and staff have not been consulted on the decision making process.”

News of this protest comes amidst a national backdrop of university privatisation controversies, after 400 students at Sussex University protested against the outsourcing of catering and support staff earlier this year, with 200 students occupying a lecture theatre.

Owen Keating, News Editor