All Categories

Why I'm Seeking to Overturn the NUS Referendum Result

8/6/2014

The following was originally posted on the NO Campaign Website

Since I’ve been involved in the student movement, one of my core convictions has been student democracy, and ensuring that what students want is at the heart of everything we do.

It is because of this that I have sought to overturn the result of this term’s NUS Referendum.

My suspicions were first raised at the count, where I observed that significantly more voter codes had been issued than was necessary. I was also surprised by the larger than expected turnout, both overall, and for ‘NO’. At this stage there was no evidence of impropriety, but I decided there was at least cause for further inquiry, and so I commissioned an informal investigation.

It became clear that there were serious irregularities in the votes cast, specifically that large clusters of ‘NO’ votes appeared to have been cast at the same time, and from the same location. At this point it was clear to me that the result needed to be voided, using the formal structures of OUSU’s governance. I therefore wrote a letter of complaint to the Returning Officer, suggesting that the referendum process had been tampered with, and that the matter should be immediately referred to the Junior Tribunal.

This process is now underway, and I await the decision of the Junior Tribunal.

The over-riding message of my campaign for the past few weeks has been that the members of OUSU know what’s best for them – that we, as student politicians, should Believe In Oxford. A victory built upon conspiracy and corruption would be hollow, hypocritical, and wrong. This is why I want to make very clear that I do not accept the result that was announced. I will be working with Tom Rutland over the coming weeks to ensure that the true wishes of Oxford students are enacted.

If there is one lesson that can be learned from this, it is that there is always a need for those who will challenge the powerful, hold the elected to account, and work to uphold our rules. As I move into my final year in Oxford, I am concerned by the lack of newcomers to the art of scrutiny and governance. I would encourage all to get involved – for the futures of our student organisations, from college society to student union, are at stake.

I would like to end by thanking everyone who has been involved with this investigative process over the past few days – you have all been most understanding, in what has been a difficult time for us all.

Jack Matthews
Campaign Leader –‘NO’ Campaign (BelieveInOxford)

JOINT STATEMENT BY JACK MATTHEWS AND TOM RUTLAND

Following the announcement of the NUS Referendum result, Jack Matthews, leader of the ‘NO’ campaign submitted a complaint, alleging serious irregularities with the process.

Both Jack Matthews, and Tom Rutland (leader of the ‘YES’ campaign), give the following statement;

“We are both concerned that the result of the referendum did not accurately reflect the views of students. We await the decision of the Junior Tribunal, and will be working together over the coming weeks to ensure that the democratic principles of OUSU are upheld.”

0 Comments

Why I won’t be taking any lessons about reform and representation from YES to NUS

19/5/2014

1 Comment

Over the past few days, the YES campaign have been talking a lot about how we have to ‘work together to win nationally’, and that we can only reform the NUS from within. While they repeatedly wheel out these platitudes, they have failed to address any of the points raised by the NO campaign.

No one from YES has commented on the fact that Oxford have passed motions at NUS, only for them to be ignored by the leadership.

No one from YES has talked about how the NUS did nothing when Oxford raised its concern about NUS democracy.

No one from YES has responded to the fact that there is no point being part of a National movement, if the NUS don’t listen to you.

To those from YES who talk so passionately about reforming the NUS from within, I ask you, what have you tried? What have you done? Because I’ve spent the best part of 4 years trying to reform the NUS from within, and it’s just not going to happen. And while there are a few true reformers within the YES camp, the real reason the campaign won’t address this issue, is because to most of them, there is nothing wrong with the NUS. To them, nothing needs reforming. A vote for YES is a vote for the status quo.

So to those who haven’t voted yet, you have two options. You can vote YES, and nothing will change. The NUS President will hail the reaffiliation as a ringing endorsement of the organisation as is. Or you can vote NO – knowing that one of the most boring rules-geeky constitution-loving freaks ever to grace the debates of OUSU tried for 4 years to reform the NUS – and the NUS just didn’t listen. And not to blow my own trumpet, but if I, as that boring rules-geeky constitution-loving freak can’t get things changed after 4 years (N.B. longer than most people are at University) then I don’t see how anyone from the YES campaign can.

Let’s stop lending our credibility to an organisation that is failing students. Vote NO.

1 Comment

NUS Conference: It was the best of times, it was the worst of times

17/4/2014

1 Comment

Last week I had the honour to represent, for the last time, the good students of Oxford University at the National Union of Students. I arrived with the same trepidation as the previous three years, knowing that I would be judged by my politics, before people had got to know me as a person, and that as a group, those who shared my politics would be in an extreme minority.

But as I left Conference, travelling on the train through Cheshire, I had a moment of quiet to think to myself and reflect. It was clear that this year’s Conference had, for me, been the best one yet. But that was nothing to do with the policy, elections, or procedure. I was because I met some superb people. I spoke with fellow centre-right students who want to have a voice in their National Union, and who have inspired me to work harder to get more people involved. I spoke to those who have been oppressed and side-lined by their Student Union’s, who yearn for a free and fair system, and who live to make our society a more open and democratic place. And I spoke to Union Officers, who spend their days working for the students that voted for them, and are coming up with brilliant new ideas to support their constituents.

Judging by social media many other people had a similar experience. There are statuses talking about how excellent the event was because of the brilliant people they met. They then go on to talk about how they feel part of a movement, and add some generic statement about how great the NUS is.

The problem is this logic is flawed. There are, indeed, many wonderful and inspiring people at NUS Conference, representing their Student Unions. But how does collecting all these people together in one place make the institution of NUS a worthy one? You simply cannot judge NUS from Conference – it’s like taking a view on Parliamentary democracy having only seen the Queen’s Speech.

What can be judged from Conference is how the NUS conducts itself. How can the individual engage, debate, and change the organisation? How well does the National Executive, and Conference, speak for the 7 million students affiliated?

To answer these questions, I can only give you my personal experiences. Firstly, I still had to share a Conference Hall with people who have publically accused me of being in favour of the murder of disabled people. Because Im a Conservative. So already I’m feeling welcome. We had issues where policy lapse motions were presented, but we were not able to see the text of what we were debating. We were voting blind. Motions were passed, opposing UKIP. Imagine what it feels like to be a UKIP student now – do you feel empowered by your National Union that so publically opposes you?

But in contrast, we saw the power of a speech. The ability of someone to stand up, from nowhere, with no hope, and completely revolutionise the future of our movement. His name was Piers Telemacque, the outsider in the election for VP Society and Citizenship. I think I am right in saying he is from the Student Broad Left faction. But that didn’t matter. He rose and gave an impassioned speech, about what he’d done and achieved, followed by his vision for the future. His speech gripped the crowd, all of them; I know of several centre-right students who voted for him regardless of his politics. It was amazing to see this happening – and to know that the spoken word still wields great power.

But with great power, comes great responsibility. Piers showed us the difference a speech can make. Once you recognise this, you realise how much power the Chair has – A speech can win a vote, but it can also loose many more. And unfortunately we saw this power used. When it came to the vote on positive discrimination for women within NUS committees, even though there were many more women wishing to give speeches in opposition than men, men were time and again picked to speak. Men speaking against reserved places for women = game over for the opposition.

The joys of the biased chair (who is a member of the National Executive) continued the next day, when, on an uncontroversial motion regarding the nomination process for the VP FE and VP HE, the Chair constantly granted extra rounds of speeches. This meant that later motions on opening up NUS, increasing transparency and the rights of individuals to hold their National representatives to account, never got heard. And on those few motions that did get discussed during that session, members of the National Executive were chosen time and again to speak, to the loss of ordinary delegates.

Piers showed us that you can make a real difference at Conference. But he had a right to stand on that stage and speak his mind, as a candidate in the election. The fact is, there is no equality in access to the podium, and if you can’t get to the podium, you can’t persuade people, and so nothing will change. I spoke on 2 motions, and that was because the Chair couldn’t pick anyone else above me – my hand was the only one in the air.

So delegates, students, whoever you may be – don’t fall for the old trick of having a great experience at Conference, meeting lots of nice people, and therefore thinking all is well with the National Union of Students. Look deeper. What did you change? What could you change? I’ve been running TheyWorkForStudents for over 3 years now. As Ive mentioned before, the NUS aren’t the biggest fan, but I worked hard, put in hundreds of hours of works, and pounds from my own pocket. But they will not listen. I have tried the ‘change it from the inside’ approach – they just look and laugh at me.

The organisation is broken. We still need a body that can represent us nationally, but not like this. I want an NUS that welcomes every student, regardless of their background, and enables them to change both their surrounds, and the NUS itself. I want an NUS that actually speaks on the issues that students have concerns about – one that talks more of education, and less about opposing UKIP and the 5:1 pay ratio.

These are basic things, but I know they are what students want of their National Union, and so I have fought for them. And I went to NUS Conference, but I didn’t have a voice. So I built TheyWorkForStudents, and they put it down and shut me out. So what now?

What would the NUS recommend to someone who had longstanding concerns with their employer, who tried to politely present them but was ignored; who then built a campaign around their ideas, which was rejected and discredited; who tried to debate and discuss, but had no voice. They would say strike.

And so that is what we must do. Strike. Strike on our payment to the NUS.

Its time to disaffiliate.

Perhaps then they will listen. Perhaps then we can get the change we deserve – a Union that speaks for students, and that empowers every one of them that wishes to engage.

Let’s build an NUS that works for students – one that we would be happy to reaffiliate to.

1 Comment

Social Media: It's All Talk and No Action

20/3/2014

1 Comment

I doubt it has escaped the few people who will actually read this blog that there has just been a big social media battle going on in Oxford. In the red corner, I Too Am Oxford, a Tumblr publicising people’s experiences of racism around Oxford University. In the blue corner, We Are All Oxford, a Tumblr responding to the previous, highlighting that Oxford is open to all those of academic ability – regardless of background.

These events logically precipitate a debate around the balance between talking openly about the real experiences of those in Oxford, and how we make sure that people are not put off applying to Oxford. Except that isn’t, for the most part, what is being debated. Instead we have once again dropped into the easy option of cheap shots being fired on Facebook, and suggestions that people should check their privilege. The questions about why people have set up certain Tumblrs and whether they are misguided are shadowing the actual and very necessary debate that will affect the lives of students for decades to come.

But what happens now? How are the issues that have been raised going to be solved? How will the valid points that both sides raised be balanced and addressed? We may never know. While both Tumblrs have done a great job in raising awareness, this is almost pointless without a follow up of action on all sides. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that social media has paralysed us, with people feeling that a ‘like’ or ‘retweet’ is enough for one of these blogs. They get a warm, fuzzy feeling that they have very publically supported these important campaigns – and no real action happens.

Cue obligatory mention of the student union. I hear that people are starting to question what OUSU Council is for, and what the point in these meetings is. The answer is simple: to address precisely the issues that have been raised above. Now I realise that we haven’t had chance for an OUSU Council since this has been raised, but I doubt anyone was thinking of bringing the debate.

The issues raised above affect all under-represented groups on Oxford. It’s about how we, as a student body, address the experiences of students and build a better Oxford, whilst at the same time making sure that those negatives about Oxford which are myths are not allowed to permeate, and that no young person of ability is put of applying.

This is going to be a complex and at times, a difficult debate to have, but we owe it to the students of tomorrow to get together and talk. But we need to do the debate properly. Facebook has killed OUSU Council. While it is easy to crowd source opinion on social media, no tweet or comment can do these issues justice. People feel they have said their piece on the topic, but no resolution is brought forward.

Council is the place to come together, to discuss, but more importantly to agree on a way forward, facilitated by the resources of our Student Union. Facebook has stirred up many opinions, but I have yet to see answers. Council has always been facts, opinion, RESOLUTION.

I will no doubt be lambasted for making this post. For poking my privileged nose into something that isn’t my business. But it is my business. I don’t want to be part of a University where the things highlighted by I Too Am Oxford happen. But I also don’t want to be part of an Institution where people are put of applying, as raised by We Are All Oxford. The difficult first steps have now been taken, but we can’t stop. Let’s have the debate, bring forward the solutions, and harness this wave of social media debate into tangible actions and results.

1 Comment

Student Leaders: Will You Defend My Right To Be Heard?

31/1/2014

3 Comments

As I come up to my final NUS Conference, and the winding down of my involvement in the Oxford University Student Union (OUSU), I think the time is right to tell the story of my experiences as a Conservative and contrarian within the student movement, and ask the simple question to all the student leaders out there: will you defend my right to be heard?

My involvement in OUSU started in early 2008 when I stood for the lowly position of Complaints Committee. It was to be my first exposure to partisanship within the movement. I will never forget how when husting, we were asked to declare out political affiliations. Down the line we went; Labour, Labour, Lib Dem, Democrat, Labour,… Conservative. There was a clearly audible gasp from the members of OUSU Council. My first experience of Student Unions and the take home message was ‘you’re not that welcome’. Now luckily I wasn’t put off – there were those from Labour, like Joel Mullan, who saw past my Party, and welcomed me simply as someone who wanted to get involved. I will not forget the kindness that he and other showed to me in the early days.

Things got a lot easier to be a Conservative within OUSU. Once people could see that all I wanted to do was my job, and do it well for the benefit of students, then divide seemed to disappear, and people replaced their distrust with statements like “I’d never vote Conservative, but I’d vote for you” – as if I was some special case among my fellow Tories. I know for a fact I am not.

We now jump ahead to my first involvement with NUS. I was elected NUS delegate in late 2010, on a platform of bringing more openness and accountability to the National Union. When NUS refused to budge on its position, I took matters into my own hands, and set up TheyWorkForStudents.co.uk (TW4S), a hub of information on the NUS that I hope helps people to better understand how they can involve themselves with the NUS and its ‘democracy’. The following story I have never made widely known until now.

Shortly after publishing TW4S, I was contacted by a staff member at the NUS. He informed me that they were concerned that I was going to publish information that shouldn’t be made public, and if truth be told, I felt he was trying to get me to take down the website. I stood firm. However in the weeks after, I received a number of anonymous phone calls, all of which told me to take down the website, to end my campaign for a more open NUS – otherwise my political career would be harmed. I was being threatened. This was a pretty scary moment for me, but I refused to be swayed. Now I don’t know who those harassing calls came from, and I probably never will. But I hope they reflect the environment that those of us who choose to challenge the status quo have to live in.

Soon after, I used a little known student right to attend the meeting of the NUS National Executive Council. My presence was announced by the President as a novelty, and the rest of NEC seemed a little confused that an ordinary student would bother to come a see what they were doing. Scrutiny and accountability are foreign concepts in the NEC. To this day, when I am able to attend, I am rarely spoken to by members of NEC – it is a very insular environment, and hardly anyone makes an effort to get to know me. Anyway, back to my first NEC. Within minutes of the meeting starting, one member began to speak of how the NUS should build a bonfire, with the Lib Dems in the middle and the Tories on the top. Imagine how I felt at my first OUSU meeting, and increase it by several orders of magnitude. I had somehow stumbled into the heart of an organisation where you could joke about the murder of someone along Party lines, and the rest of the room wouldn’t bat an eyelid.

During those early months of my NUS involvement I considered packing it all in several times. I’ve never been one for giving up – but I was constantly questioning how I could possibly make any difference against a never ending stream of derision. Strength came from an email sent to me whilst on the train to NUS Conference 2011, from a Sabbatical Officer at the University of Victoria, Canada. The message closed with “If anyone ever says that your work to open up the NUS is 'damaging' the NUS... always remember... without work like what you are doing, the NUS could be much, much worse than what you may be experiencing right now.” That email, from a complete stranger, remains the thing I go back to whenever I have doubts. Thanks to you Kelsey Hannan.

Since Kelsey’s email, I have attended 3 NUS National Conferences, and while the policies and debate may change, one things is noticeably constant: someone always feels the need to stand up and ask delegates to be more respectful of each other; to recognise that some students are, indeed, Conservatives; and that they have just as much right to attend Conference and be heard.

Back in 2011 at my first Conference I decided to conduct a little experiment. I had heard the rumours of how rampantly Left NUS was, so for one afternoon, I hung my security pass around my neck from a Conservative Party lanyard, rather than the official one we were provided with. There were double takes. There were stares. There were glares. But most strangely, someone felt it necessary to go up to my Student Union President, and inform him that one of his delegation was a Conservative. As if it was something that needed mentioning for the good of public safety. So while others could walk freely, emblazed in their Labour and SWP logos, I was made to feel like I didn’t belong. I won’t even go into the endless speeches to Conference about ‘Tory scumbags’.

National Conference 2013 was an incredible experience, but at times very tough. I was running Peter Smallwood’s election campaign, which was stressful enough, and then, on the first day of Conference, it was announced the Margaret Thatcher has died. This was a tough time; not only had Peter and I lost one of our political heroes, but I, as Returning Officer of Oxford University Conservative Association, has responsibilities to fulfil (Baroness Thatcher was Patron of OUCA). I set about writing a quick statement to be sent to the membership, and also to the Press. I realise that Margaret was a controversial figure, but what occurred next, I could have never expected, not even at NUS Conference.

Sat alone, I quietly typed away. Yet someone sat behind me, who was obviously reading what I was typing, thought it the right time to launch into a speech about how nasty and evil Thatcher was. Now he has a right to those views, and to express them. But to say such strong things to someone quietly writing the obituary of someone who has just died, who they hold dear, is one of the most insensitive things I have come across in all my 6 years of student politics. The vitriol was so great I felt no longer able to remain on Conference floor, and left the building. I was effectively hounded out from participating in the democratic event I was elected to attend. Later that day, a brave women representing the students of Stirling stood up, and as had happened at every Conference before, declared her Conservative affiliation, and called on all delegates to be more respectful. It makes me proud that there are people like Jade around to stand up for Freedom within our movement.

So where am I going with all of this? Well we have a problem, and it’s that our NUS does not reflect the membership it claims to represent. I’ve been doing all I can to counter this. It’s hard to persuade centre-right students to engage with Student Unions and the NUS, but slowly more and more are getting involved. And I don’t expect things to change overnight, or for it to be easy. Politics shouldn’t be easy. But having tried for years now, I am increasingly coming to the conclusion that there is something very wrong within our Student Movement. Something that prevents the open debate we need and desire. Something that prohibits our NUS reflecting the views of the 7 million students it claims to speak for.

This isn’t about being a Conservative. And it’s not about TheyWorkForStudents, or even being a contrarian. It’s about being different from the norm.

How am I to encourage more students to engage in the democratic processes of their Student Union or NUS, if all they will be met with is derision and disdain? NUS says that all its democratic events should be ‘safe spaces’ – I’ve yet to see it myself. I don’t want to be misunderstood – I am not looking for an easy ride, but until the debates can be about policies and not people, how are we going to get the National Union we all deserve?

So I look to all student leaders, indeed to all students, to stand up and protect the right of students to be heard – even if their views are different to yours. Every meeting you go to, from SU Council to NUS Conference, there will be people attending for the first time. Let’s make sure they leave with a sense of belonging – that they had there opportunity to speak, and that they were heard.

My time is coming to an end. I will admit I have become more disillusioned over the years, and disappointed that change was not possible I wanted. But before I move on to the big wide world, I wanted one last try at changing the culture of our movement. It’s time every voice was welcomed and heard. And besides, you might be surprised just how often we all agree.

3 Comments

OUSU Council: What Happened to Debate and Scrutiny?

30/10/2013

1 Comment

I have had the pleasure of being part of the Oxford University Student Union (OUSU) Scrutiny Committee since January 2011. Over this time I have always endeavored to hold our officers to account, but also to act as an informal way for Sabbatical Officers to air their views in confidence, so that issues could be dealt with early and ‘nipped in the bud’. It has been a thoroughly enjoyable experience to have worked with so many amazing people, and to have been able to observe, so close to the coal face, the great achievements OUSU has made.

However, I no longer feel I can continue in this role. I have become more and more concerned with the culture of OUSU Council, which increasingly shies away from debate and scrutiny. Though I still have faith in myself and my intentions I no longer feel I have the confidence of Council to do what I was elected to do. I therefore have no option but to resign from Scrutiny Committee, and to speak out against the unhealthy culture developing within our Student Union’s Council.

At OUSU Council – 3rd Wk Michaelmas Term 2013 I made the following statement to OUSU Council;

Resignation Statement

I love my Student Union, and I love OUSU Council. Over the past 6 years I have had the immense honour to serve the students of this University, in one form or another. I always stood up for what I thought was right, as did those around me - promoting rich and diverse debate, and a better outcome for students.

Council exist to represent the voice of students and to convey their opinion. It exists to elect certain office holders. And it exists to hold those in power to account.

However, I have recently noticed a change in the culture of Council. Debate is stifled, either by the urge of representatives not to be here, or, as I have now become aware, because people feel that they cannot speak their mind for fear of political or personal retribution.

And I see this when I speak in Council. I see the negative reaction I receive for asking completely legitimate questions of our representatives. I hear the groans when I stand to speak on motions. But this isn’t about me – there are others who are also treated this way. Every student has the right to speak in Council. But what must those brave few, who actually turn up, thick when they arrive? Are they provided with an environment where every view, whatever it may be, is welcomed and heard?

We have rolled out the principle of Unity to the point where proper debate and scrutiny is being hindered. Put simply, the views of students and Common Rooms are not being fully heard. And this scares me.

I will continue to speak in Council, and represent my Common Room. But while I still have confidence in what I do, and that I do it out of a love for my Student Union, it has become all too apparent that Council no longer has confidence in the work I do in holding our representatives to account. I am also aware that some have (incorrectly) connected the severity of last terms Scrutiny Report with my presence on the committee. I will not allow this unfounded lack of confidence in myself, to affect the important work of a body whose reports need to have the approval and faith of Council. It is for this reason that I have decided to resign from Scrutiny Committee.

I know there are others, like me, who are unhappy with the culture of this body. I ask you all to find the courage to speak your mind, so that we, Council, can return to fulfilling the responsibilities entrusted to us.

1 Comment

It’s time Conservative students engaged with the NUS and Student Unions

2/4/2013

1 Comment

This article is posted on the Conservative Student blog, and can be found here; http://www.conservativestudent.co.uk/platform/its-time-conservative-students-engaged-with-the-nus-and-student-unions/

1 Comment

Labour Lacks The Respect Needed For One Nationism

5/10/2012

1 Comment

At this year’s Labour Party Conference, Leader of the Opposition Ed Miliband reached out into Conservative territory and attempted to claim the hill of One Nationism; planting a Red Rose among the many Conservative Oaks that live there. It sounds like madness, even when you throw away my spurious analogy. But Ed delivered what I think is universally accepted as his best speech yet, and one that appeared to go down well; at least in my twittersphere.

On first appearance, some Conservatives may be worried by this new positioning of Ed. But on second thoughts, is the Labour membership, leadership, and Ed really up to this? Do they really believe in it?
To me, One Nation Conservatism is about everyone in society having a responsibility to each other. It’s about respect. So on a national level, to be a One Nation Leader, you must govern for the good of the entire country, giving respect to everyone of all backgrounds and beliefs.

I believe I speak for the vast majority of my Party, membership and leadership alike, that the Labour Party does what it does because it wishes for a better Britain. Labour and Conservatives seek the same goal; we just take different paths to get there. However, when I watch Labour Party Conference, I hear a message of vitriol and disgust, from the top to the bottom of the Party, of how the Conservatives are out to destroy the NHS, Schools, etc. They believe Conservatives are actively working to destroy our country. This is by no means the view of all Labour Party members, but it’s clear to see in the speeches from Shadow Cabinet and delegates alike that this is not isolated to a few.

Call me old fashioned, but I still believe in the honour of politics; that David Cameron leads this country with the best intentions of us all, and just as importantly that Ed Miliband opposes with a sincere conviction that we must take a different route to prosperity. But so often I don’t see that view reciprocated back across from Labour.

Labour scorn Conservatives, bash the bankers, deride millionaires and ridicule Etonians. But each one of these groups is part of this Nation. Ed Miliband continues to divide our society without concern for the Whole. Until Ed gets his head around this, he fundamentally cannot lead a One Nation party.

1 Comment

The Squeezed Middle-Lander

28/9/2012

0 Comments

I read with interest the blog post by Aaron Spence titled ‘CF Chairmanship: Northern Bred and Northern Based’ and thought a response was in order.

I completely agree with Aaron’s analysis that we, the Conservative Party, do need a step change in how we engage with different parts of Britain – and that one of these areas is the North. However, while I recognise the mention of the Midlands, this article still speaks to an unfortunately growing idea among Conservative Future; North vs. South.

This notion of a Country of two halves, not only artificially divides us, but fails to recognise that Britain has a much richer regional heritage than North and South. The idea forgets that the North and the South have their own internal variations, and that there's more to the UK than these two regions; what of Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland? But most of all this concept glosses over those of us in the centre of our country – the increasingly Squeezed Middle(Landers).

You may say I am just being pernickety – but my point has serious political consequences. I am a proud Midlander, and within that proud to be a Black Country boy. As Gavin Williamson MP said in his maiden speech to the House of Commons, we are a straight talking people. This has important implications on how to communicate on the doorstep; there is no point beating around the bush with highfalutin political language. The ladies and gentleman of South Staffordshire, Wolverhampton, Dudley and Walsall would rather hear the news, good or bad, told straight and to the point. This may not work everywhere; but it works for us.

What we must remember is that the National Chairman, and for that matter all the National Executive of Conservative Future, are there to serve the entirety of our Country. So you may think a Northern candidate for National Chairman will have interesting insights into winning seats in Liverpool and Leeds, but is that going to help us advance in the South-West, build membership in the Midlands or support the encouraging CF developments in Northern Ireland?

It is much more important we have a Chairman who identifies the differences across CF, and gives support accordingly, but also recognises what unites us as a whole; our will to see a Conservative majority in 2015. Politics has become too much about where someone is from; and not enough about what they do and where they are going. When the time comes to vote, it will be the person with a vision, a truly national plan that supports all of CF, that will be getting my vote; and I couldn’t care less about where they come from.

0 Comments

A Palaeontological Call to Arms to Save a Word

20/3/2012

0 Comments

Inspiration can come from the strangest of places. I was just writing an email to fellow Oxford Palaeontologists asking them to come for a pint in the local pub, the Lamb and Flag, and wasnt sure if I had spelled 'fossily' (as in fossil-like) correctly, or indeed if it was a real word at all.

A quick check on the Oxford English Dictionary website revealed it wasn't a word, so I proceeded to spell it however I liked. I did however discover a palaeo-related word I had never heard before, one that is sadly on the verge of literary extinction. The OED lists it as an 'obselete word'.

fossilry, n. Obs. rare. A collection of fossils.

The OED reveals this brilliant word was mainly used in the mid 18th to mid 19th Centuries;

1755 Gentleman's Mag. Dec. 567/2 Verses occasion'd by seeing the Fossilry at Tenderves in Cornwall.
1865 S. Smiles Lives of Boulton & Watt xvi. 321 One of his favourite amusements was collecting and arranging fossils, some for his friend Wedgwood, and others for his own ‘fossilry’ at Soho

How has such a wonderfully simple word come so close to the chop. It instantly conveys its meaning, and I'm sure would be immediately understandable to the general public.

So Palaeontologists everywhere, I call you to arms. Next time you write that grant proposal, blogpost, thesis chapter or journal article, think about whether you can include the word 'fossilry', and help save a poor helpless word from interminable doom. Besides, the fossil record for words isnt as good as the things we study, so we should try and keep 'fossilry' alive as long as possible!

JJM
Writing from the Oxford Ediacaran Fossilry

0 Comments

<<Previous

Forward>>

Archives

Categories