840

Beaver

Issue 840 | 17.11.15

the

Newspaper of the LSE Students’ Union

LSE ‘Students For Britain’ Interrupt Prime Minister’s Speech

Credit: Christopher Madden

Greg Sproston News Editor

LSE Mourns Paris Victims A contingent of LSE Students march for Free Education on the #grantsnotdebt protest.

Valentin Ribet, Class of 2014 LSE Graduate, amongst those killed in the November 13th attacks on Paris.

Read a message from LSESU French Society below: Nicolas Vecchioli LSESU French Society THE HEINOUS MASSACRE OF innocent civilians in Paris has left us all in shock. Being the powerless witnesses of such barbaric attacks is absolutely sickening. The French community at LSE is heartbroken. Many of us grew up in Paris, lived in these districts and have been to those cafés, concert halls or stadium.

Our identity is directly under threat.

People were assassinated on the basis of their belonging to the French nationality.

But beyond Paris and France, this attack

is an attack against the whole of mankind and everyone sharing values of tolerance and freedom. The places targeted bore no symbolic weight but the spirit of the city.

And it’s precisely what they were aiming at. As disgusted as we are, we shall not let terrorists dispossess us of our most sacred right: the right to life. We will not give into fear, mistrust and hatred. The LSE French community will stand in solidarity with the victims, knowing that it has the utmost support of the entire School. Even shaken and wounded, France will remain united by its core values: Liberté, Égalité, Fraternité.

T W O S E C O N D Y E A R undergraduates at the London School of Economics (LSE) interrupted a speech given

by David Cameron, the Prime Minister of the UK, this week. The students, Peter Lyon and Phil Sheppard, gatecrashed a conference where the Prime Minister was speaking to voice their concerns about the European Union. Cameron has seen a fair amount of dissent by students during his premiership, but little of it has been communicated this directly to the Prime Minister. This protest received heavy coverage from the national news media.

Infiltrating the Confederation of British Industry’s annual conference by posing as businessmen, Government & Economics student Peter Lyon and History student Phil Sheppard waited until the Prime Minister took the stage before unfurling a banner reading ‘CBI = Voice of Brussels’, a criticism of the CBI’s Pro-European stance, and chanting the slogan on their banner before eventually being escorted out.

The protest was coordinated by Vote Leave, a campaign to remove Britain from the EU. Sheppard told The Beaver that ‘we got in using a company that Vote Leave created for us, Lyon Shepard Web Solutions. They bought us the tickets to get in.’

Lyon added that they just ‘walked straight in; the CBI were oblivious. I thought it was too good an opportunity to miss to actually have an impact on a political issue which I believe in.’

Cameron was quick to dismiss the students and declare them to be ‘making fools of [themselves]’ before their exit. Given the allegations about his university days that continue to dog the Prime Minister, it seems a little hypocritical and more than unfair for political engagement to be considered ‘foolish’ when compared with other extra-curricular activities.

The pair’s motivation for the protest, according to Sheppard, was ‘because we felt the CBI were misrepresenting British Business in saying that business is overwhelmingly pro-EU when the majority of businesses, especially small and medium size ones are Eurosceptic.’

Features partB

Sheppard didn’t dispute the mainstream media claim that the guerilla-style protest cost ‘Vote Leave’ around £1,500 but maintains it was absolutely worth it. Contrasting the EU debate with domestic hot potato issues, such as changes to working tax credits and university grant abolition, he stressed that such policies could be reversed by future parliaments as opposed to an EU Referendum which would have a binding commitment. Interestingly, this is a common argument for voting to remain; leaving the EU closes a door forever and, as we have seen in Scotland, a referendum decision to stay doesn’t necessarily put the topic to bed.

The protest featured prominently in the national news, attracting coverage from The Huffington Post, The Telegraph and Sky News. Of the response to the protest, Sheppard said that ‘we received quite a lot of press coverage and most importantly, Students for Britain, the student branch affiliated to Vote Leave, increased its membership by 30, which is quite a large amount‘. Lyon added ‘The reaction was pretty positive but it opened my eyes to what it’s like to be in the public eye and making a stand on something a lot of people feel strongly about.’.

Just as important as the issues themselves are the nature in which they’re tackled, and this protest and the traction it gained in the mainstream media must surely be viewed positively not just by those at LSE, but students in general. In an atmosphere where young people are still unfairly branded with stereotypes and claims of fecklessness and a lack of political engagement that extends further than their own noses, it is refreshing and exciting to see students take on complex issues in a constructive way.

Relishing an open debate on the future of the EU, Phil Sheppard recommended that the Europhiles should take note of the Vote Leave stunt and ‘go ahead’ with the airing of their own opinions but provided a cautionary note, noting that a hostile reception from Eurosceptics with ‘questionable views’ on immigration might be possible.

Remaining tight lipped on the future plans for EU want-aways, the students refused to be drawn into specifics other than to suggest that Vote Leave may well have other things up their sleeves.

Is state surveillance a threat to Political Fiction reading list to get you civil liberty? away from Journals and Statistics Page 28 Page 16

Room 2.02, Saw Swee Hock Student Centre, LSE Students’ Union London WC2A 2AE Executive Editor Ellen Wilkie

editor@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Managing Editor Megan Crockett

managing@thebeaveronline.co.uk

News Editors Shwetha Chandrashekhar Suyin Haynes Greg Sproston news@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Beaver

the

the

Beaver

Established in 1949 Issue No. 840 - Tuesday 17 November 2015 -issuu.com/readbeaveronline Telephone: 0207 955 6705 Email: editor@thebeaveronline.co.uk Website: www.beaveronline.co.uk Twitter: @beaveronline

LSESU Conservatives @LSESUTories Good to see our members responding to our call and writing articles for the @ beaveronline this week

comment@thebeaveronline.co.uk

PartB Editors Kemi Akinboyewa Vikki Hui Flo Edwards

partb@thebeaveronline.co.uk

George Burton @George__Burton #PrayForParis #PrayForBaghdad #PrayForBeirut #PrayForJapan #PrayForLebanon #PrayForMexico

The City Editor Alex Gray

city@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Features Editor Alex Hurst Taryana Odayar

features@thebeaveronline.co.uk

The Nab Editor

nab@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Sport Editor Alex Dugan

The overall message: #pray

sports@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Online Editor Gee Linford-Grayson

Sam @Rhys_Povey Perhaps #LSE should spend @craigjcalhoun‘s 60k business class budget on a couple of competent employees for time tables #justanidea

online@thebeaveronline.co.uk

Collective Chair Perdita Blinkhorn

collective@thebeaveronline.co.uk

The Collective:

To join the Collective you need to have written for 3 or more editions of The Beaver. Think you’ve done that but don’t see your name on the list? Email collective@thebeaveronline.co.uk to let us know!

Any opinions expressed herein are those of their respective authors and not necessarily those of the LSE Students’ Union or Beaver Editorial Staff.

The Beaver is issued under a Creative Commons license.

Katie Budd @klebudd Fantastic event tonight on tackling homophobia and sexism in rugby, all credit to Tom @juliaryland

The Beaver would like to echo the following sentiments shared by the LSE on social media this weekend. We offer our sincere condolences to Valentin’s friends, family and classmates.

Comment Editors Mali Williams

A Doherty, A Fyfe, A Laird, A Leung, A Lulache, A Moro, A Qazilbash, A Santhanham, A Tanwa, A Thomson, B Phillips, C Holden, C Loughran, C Morgan, C Hu, D Hung, D Lai, D Sippel, D Tighe, E Arnold, E Wilkie, G Cafiero, G Harrison, G Kist, G Linford-Grayson, G Manners-Armstrong, G Saudelli, H Brentnall, H Prabu, H Toms, I Plunkett, J Cusack, J Evans, J Foster, J Grabiner, J Heeks, J Momodu, J Ruther, J Wurr, K Budd, K Owusu, K Parida, K Quinn, L Kang, L Kendall, L Erich, L Mai, L Montebello, L Schofield, L van der Linden, M BanerjeePalmer, M Crockett, M Gallo, M Jaganmohan, M Johnson, M Neergheen, M Pasha, M Pennill, M Strauss, N Antoniou, N Bhaladhare, N BuckleyIrvine, N Stringer, O Hill, O Gleeson, P Amoroso, P Blinkhorn, P Gederi, R Browne, R J Charnock, R Huq, R Kouros, R Serunjogi, R Siddique, R Uddin, R Way, S Ali, S Crabbe-Field, S Kunovska, S Povey, S Sebatindira, T Mushtaq, T Odayar, T Poole, V Hui, Z Chan, Z Mahmod

Nona Buckley-Irvine @nonajasmine Rest in peace Valentin Ribet. #ParisAttacks

LSESU RAG @lsesurag All our teams have now set off from the wonderful land of Cromer, home of Pier of the Year 2015! #CarryThemHome

Ellen Wilkie on the attacks in Paris, empathy and Eurocentrism

From the Executive Editor IT IS DIFFICULT TO SAY something meaningful about the Paris attacks. I feel it would be doing those affected a disservice to offer my own relatively uninformed opinions. To express my upset at the events would feel like an insult to the grief felt by those with real ties to the events. It goes without saying that I was horrified. Everyone was.

This leads me onto the big question that I have been faced with on Facebook all weekend.

Why have we had such a visceral reaction to this attack on Paris, when the response to similar attacks in Beirut, Baghdad, Kenya and so many other countries have had comparatively meagre coverage both in the mass media and in our thoughts?

None of these atrocities is more tragic than another. Objectively, the loss of a human life on one continent is no less tragic than the loss of it on another. Regardless of the skin colour of the attacker and the victim, the crimes are all unforgivable and horrific. So why is

it that this event in Paris has struck us so dumb when others don’t even stay on the front page of a news website for more than a few hours?

This editorial is not intended to justify this prioritisation in our hearts of one tragedy over another, but merely means to rationalise it on a personal level. I have many feelings about the attacks in Paris, and one of those is undoubtedly guilt that I have so many feelings about it when I have been so blase about suffering in the rest of the world.

The Paris attacks are close to home, both geographically and culturally. It shouldn’t be the case that we need to have a personal tie to a place in order to feel the pain of its people, but it is understandable that it is. When we know nothing of an area beyond words on a page and images on a screen then our ability to empathise is diminished.

It is easier, when you have no ties or knowledge about a country, to scroll past its pain in your newsfeed. When the city affected

is a journey on the Eurostar away, and is somewhere you’ve visited on a number of occasions, then there is a stronger urge to click, to read, to share and to empathise.

The eyewitness accounts by survivors of the Paris attacks are familiar. They tell of 20 somethings going out to see a band with their friends on a Friday night. They tell of husbands and wives having dinner and wine after a long week of work. They tell of boyfriends throwing their bodies over their girlfriends to shield them from a rain of bullets.

As I write this I can think of so many valid counter arguments against this point. It is no excuse to say that I can’t empathise beyond my own sphere of understanding.

This attack gave me, and all of the West a shock. Hopefully this suffering will remind us all to spread our empathy beyond our own immediate surroundings.

Tragedy is tragedy, no matter where it happens, and I certainly will not forget that any time soon.

LSE Students’ Union @lsesu #UGM results - the taxi regulation motion fails to reach quoracy and does not pass.

But thank you to all who voted!

Craig Calhoun @craigjcalhoun The world is woven together in a fabric that grows frayed with each atrocity, each overreaction, and constant neglect.

Tweet us @beaveronline to see your 140 characters in print!

LSE Director’s Pay and Expenses Criticized in National Press Kallum Pearmain Undergraduate Student THE DAILY MAIL RAN AN exposé last week on public sector pay packets titled: “Fat cat university heads on £600,000: Student fees going up. Courses slashed, but don’t worry, it’s boom time for vice chancellors.”

The piece profiled and heavily criticized the pay of vice chancellors, academic staff and professors from UK academic institutions.

Suggesting that leaders at UK institutions are pocketing “up to £600,000 a year – four times the Prime Minister’s salary,” The Mail outlined several shocking revelations. The report unveiled that former head of London Metropolitan University, Malcolm Gillies earned £618,000 in the last year notwithstanding London Met’s ranking as 126 out of 126 by the Complete University Guide. It continued to share that Neil Gorman of Nottingham Trent University is the “country’s highest paid vice chancellor,” reported to have earned a massive package worth £623,000 last year.

Craig Calhoun, vice chancellor of London School of Economics and Political Sciences (LSE), was panned for earning £394,000 last year as the Director of the LSE. With university coverage for his expenses, including ‘furnishings, phone costs and private medical insurance,’ Calhoun was reported to also have spent £59,811 on business class flights alone last year for cited work travel.

The Mail’s Investigations Unit uncovered information that Calhoun was permitted to take his wife Pamela DeLargy, a UN special advisor, on a trip to Colombia, granted that she cover costs for her travel. Whether or not she stayed in the hotel room covered by the LSE is unknown.

Calhoun’s £394,000 pay package last year comprised of a £327,000 salary, £18,000 in taxable benefits and £49,000 in pension contributions. The benefits have been reported as directly covering his accommodation in London which is estimated to rent at a market rate of £120,000 a year.

In support of Calhoun’s generous pay package, the LSE commented that Professor Calhoun “had an appropriate salary for his role and that the vast majority of its funding comes from sources other than the Government. It further stated that “as the university is international, the vice-chancellor’s role inevitably requires a lot of travel.” Further, Calhoun’s business class flights were warranted so that he can be productive “during the flight and immediately after.”

This is amidst news earlier this year, in which The Complete University Guide’s 2016 League Table reported the London School of Economics in the bottom 20 for student satisfaction, despite ranking as the third best university overall. Students at LSE rated their satisfaction 3.95 out of five, largely measuring the quality of teaching on campus, with students at Oxford and Cambridge rating their

satisfaction levels at 4.17 and over out of five.

A spokesperson from LSE provided the full email that the Daily Mail was supplied with, of which part was used to illustrate the story. The full statement is as follows: “LSE is one of the most international universities in the world.

Around two-thirds of our students are from overseas, coming from around 155 countries worldwide; just under half of our staff are from outside the UK, and we have a network of over 133,000 graduates in more than 190 countries. In addition to a range of international exchanges and connections, LSE has formal academic partnerships with universities in New York, Paris, Singapore, Cape Town and Beijing.

A crucial part of the Director’s role at LSE is to maintain this array of international relationships and establish new links with universities, businesses and non-governmental organisations around the world. Inevitably this involves a significant amount of international travel. The Director visited Colombia on LSE-related business in November 2014, his wife joined him in the country but this was not at the expense of the School.

It is common practice for universities to provide accommodation to an institution’s Vice Chancellor close to campus. LSE provides housing and related costs for its Director with the condition that it is used for hosting student, alumni, staff and School meetings and events. The ‘benefits in kind’ mentioned, and outlined in LSE’s 2013-

14 annual accounts, are primarily related to this accommodation and include the annual apartment service charges, domestic utility bills, furnishing, phone expenses, and private medical insurance. The School provides private medical insurance as a benefit-in-kind primarily to cover the Director during overseas trips. The Director pays tax on all the benefits in kind.

The recruitment and pay of the LSE Director was overseen by a School selection committee tasked with attracting a high calibre international candidate able to take on the complex, challenging and wideranging responsibilities of running a world-leading university. The committee considered a number of issues to ensure the salary was appropriate, including salaries at comparable universities in the UK and globally. The Director’s salary is reviewed annually by the School’s Remuneration Committee.”

Regarding the article and issue, former LSESU General Secretary 2013-2014 Jay Stoll told The Beaver: “The photo breached privacy settings and I have complained formally. Further the Mail claim the picture was ‘on a trip with a colleague’, it was taken in a pub on Fleet Street after a Council meeting. It may not suit the Mail’s narrative, but during my time at the SU, Craig Calhoun took every opportunity to hear and then act upon students concerns” The Beaver was given express permission to print the below image by Jay Stoll himself.

Section Editor: Shwetha Chandrashekhar Suyin Haynes Greg Sproston Deputy Editors: Joseph Briers Bhadra Sreejith

News

Photocredit: Jay Stoll

News | 3

4 | Tuesday November 17, 2015

LSESU Green Week Begins; Battle Against Climate Change Continues

Joseph Briers Deputy News Editor

LSE’S ANNUAL ‘GREEN Week’ has rarely been quite so pertinent. This year’s annual fiesta of sustainability comes at a time when climate change is very much on the international political agenda. Next month will see heads of state from across the globe come together in Paris for what has been deemed by some the most crucial environmental meet-up of a generation. The temperature rise threshold at which experts expect the effects of climate change to really start to bite (2℃ above pre-industrial levels) is fast approaching and the Paris Climate Summit may well represent our last realistic chance to avert impending ecological doom.

But if LSE100 has taught us anything, it is that international compromise on such topics is verging on impossible. For more instant and tangible, if slightly less dramatic, advances one should to look to the LSE. ‘Sustainability at

LSE’ reports that through the introduction of a printer login system early last year the School has saved almost 70 trees worth of paper. As an institution the School has long been active in promoting awareness of environmental issues and Green Week marks a peak in eco-activism as students and staff aim to raise awareness of what are arguably the earth’s most pressing issues.

SU Environment and Ethics Officer Elena Bignami is convinced of the importance of such initiatives. “Now more than ever we need cohesive engagement by students, universities, institutions and governments to make sure that the forces that will determine social and environmental outcomes are focused on a low carbon future” she says. Anyone eager to answer Bignami’s call to arms will be faced with an array of opportunities through which to express environmental angst.

On Monday the victors of the LSESU Creative Climate Change Competition, a contest encouraging the submission of

environmentally inspired artistic contributions, will be revealed alongside performances from spoken word artists Inua Ella’s and Rachel Long. The FoodCycle Society will be celebrating Green Week in typically worthy fashion - living on a food budget of just £2.86 each day to highlight the plight of the estimated 4 million people affected by food poverty.

Many more events are planned for the week ranging from an animal rights photography exhibition to a trip to the UK’s most sustainable building, the Crystal.

Amongst all the Green Week festivities, more permanent environmental innovations are sprouting throughout campus. Cyclists rejoice - LSE welcomed its first bike pump last week, and Bignami insists there is more to come, telling the Beaver that she hopes to realise the implementation of two new water fountains, one in the Saw Swee Hock and the other on the LG floor of the library, before the end of term.

Yet, Green Week does not shy away from the more heavyweight

aspects of the climate change dialogue. Whilst the future health of the earth may be murky, Bignami insists ‘the vision is clear: a green economy that champions renewable resources and smart technol-

ogy, a global political system that strives to offset greenhouse gas emissions, and civic society that fights for social justice and environmental wellbeing’. No pressure then.

NUS Demo to #cutthecosts Re-Imagine Your James Clark Staff Writer

ON DECEMBER 8TH, THE National Union of Students (NUS) will gather to lobby Westminster to #cutthecosts. The NUS has announced this in response to the UK Government’s recent plans to alter funding for students and proposed cuts to further education. These plans will “stop many from continuing their education” according to the NUS. In July, Chancellor George Osborne announced in the budget that maintenance grants will be scrapped for students in September 2016. Currently students with parents on an income of less than £42,620 are entitled to a grant which extends up to £3,387 for students with parents earning less than £25,000.

These grants leave entitled students with more money while they are studying with less debt by the end of their course compared to a student who is only entitled to a loan. These grants will be replaced with loans, approaching close to £11,000, for students who will begin in September 2016.

In addition to Osborne’s plan to cut grants, he has also stated that tuition fees could also increase with the rate of inflation, to figures above £9,000.

The result of both of these new initiatives will mean that for students whose parents earn less than £25,000, the total debt at

the end of a 3 year under graduate degree could be higher than £60,000 compared to an estimated £46,000 on the current system.

The president of NUS, Megan Dunn commented that George Osborne’s July budget “created a perfect storm that will stop many from continuing their education.” With a poll by YouGov, the announcement by Osborne was the least popular, with over half of the respondents stating that it wasn’t fair.

The NUS are using this statistic to their advantage in one of their campaigns for better treatment of students by the UK government, calling the decision “draconian” and mentioning the effect it could have on students from Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland. However, Osborne has claimed that there is a “basic unfairness in asking taxpayers to fund grants for people who are likely to earn a lot more than them”.

The lobby is currently planned for between 11am and 4pm outside the Houses of Parliament and is another step in the strategy created by the NUS to stop the cuts and the negative effects on poorer students.

With an estimated 500,000 students currently affected by the decision, the question will be whether the Government views the grants as a way to open up education for all, or just another lump sum that can be used to balance the books.

Education At ‘The Unconference’ Bhadra Sreejith Deputy News Editor

Photocredit: Flickr Corey Oakley

WANT TO DISCUSS YOUR LSE education? Have some complaints or suggestions for improving student satisfaction?

The Unconference — the second Reimagining Our Education event of the year – will be held on the 6th floor at the Saw Swee Hock Student Centre on Thursday, 19th November, from 6 to 7:30pm. The purpose of this event is to listen to student feedback and positively develop LSE’s teaching methods.

The first Reimagining Our Education Event was held on October 8th and had Craig Calhoun, Michael Cox, Shakantula Banaji and Vanessa Iwowo in attendance. They talked about what their idea of an LSE education was and participated in the Q&A session later, questioned by students who had specific questions about certain parts of their LSE experience. One aspect particularly highlighted by Craig Calhoun was the School’s poor performance in the student satisfaction index in the league tables and the

School’s attempt to remedy that: when grilled, though, he failed to mention specifics.

According to Jon RhysFoster, the LSESU Education Officer, taken from his interview with Jane Hindle on the LSE teaching blog, “With ReImagining, through a number of events and online consultation we are aiming to hold one of the biggest, most engaging discussions with students in LSE’s history. Ultimately we are giving students the opportunity to lead conversations, interact with academics and to help shape the future direction of the School and its offer to students. For LSE to deliver on its world leading education, it is vital that students are at the heart of those conversations.”

At the Unconference, there will be no set debates or panel discussions – the topics to be debated will be up to the audience; hence the name. It will be a chance to communicate with the Students’ Union, the Teaching and Learning Centre and other senior figures within the School. The Unconference is free, but booking a place will ensure a place as they are limited. Beer and pizza will be provided.

LSE Celebrates Interfaith Week

Shahnia Rahman Staff Writer

L S E I S C E L E B R AT I N G Interfaith Week 2015 from the 16th November to 20th November, with a range of exciting events on campus for all to enjoy.

Interfaith Week is held annually at LSE, each year with the aim of raising awareness of the diverse range of faiths and traditions we have within our student body. It is a great way to learn something new about other faiths and come together to meet new people.

‘LSESU puts on an interfaith week annually in order to em-

power our faith members and societies and encourage stronger relations between each other. It’s a great time to dispel misconceptions about faith and raise awareness about our diverse traditions within the LSE community. I encourage students to learn something new about another faith this week, you may be surprised’ – Aysha Al-Fekaiki, Community Welfare Officer On the first day of interfaith week, LSESU faith societies will be holding stalls outside the Saw Swee Hock Centre from 11 – 2, where they will share their culture and food as well has hold discussions on how faith empowers them and young people

today. There are also two talks, an all women inter-faith panel discussing the role of women in their religion and another discussing British values and what they mean to us.

One of the big events to look forward to this year as part of Interfaith Week is a volunteering event at the Interfaith Peace Garden on the 19th November.

There are two slots during the day where students can go to help refurbish the garden. Spaces are limited so if you are interested, contact Aysha Fekaiki, your community welfare office at su.communitywelfare@lse. ac.uk.

To end the fantastic week off,

there will be an interfaith social on Friday at 12pm in the LSESU Denning Learning Café with kosher, halal and veggie food, open to all students of faith.

Also, throughout the week, there will be a Pledge Tree whereby students will be able to take a leaf-pledge (with an item written on it), and bring this in for a collection for Syrian Refugees. This is supported by the Separated Child charity.

Make sure to look out for all the events and activities on offer as part of Interfaith Week!

For more information, visit the LSESU Interfaith Week Facebook page.

Campaign To Save LSE Nursery: Time to Throw Toys out of the Pram?

Perdita Blinkhorn Collective Chair LSE STUDENTS WERE GREETED outside the Old building on the Thursday of reading week with a protest picnic organised by Community and Welfare Officer Aysha Al-Fekaiki. This follows the launch of the “Save the Nursery” campaign the SU is promoting in order to push the School to improve conditions in the existing LSE nursery and guarantee it for years to come.

The campaign arose after it was revealed that the nursery, currently located in Grosvenor House, is only guaranteed until 2020 and concerns have been raised over the conditions of the environment LSE students and staff leave their children to be cared for while studying and working. This follows an LSE survey, in which there were only 25

respondents, which asked “If you required nursery services when you returned to work, did you (or do you intend to) use the LSE Nursery?” Only 3 of those surveyed in this small and arguably unreflective sample answered yes, causing the School to suggest that there is no demand for university child care at LSE. In a recent Huffington post article, Al-Fekaiki harshly criticized LSE’s management of the nursery, suggesting that “Over the last eight years the nursery has been underfunded and de-prioritised”. While the nurseries of London universities such as UCL are ironically over-subscribed, the LSE one has received unacceptably low Ofsted ratings and has consistently failed to fix problems such as leaks, pests and open grates where members of the public can throw cigarette buds down to where the children are.

Despite boasting of its “happy, safe and stimulating environment.”

On their webpage, LSE have suggested, according to the SU petition, that the facility is a “drain on resources”. The running of the nursery by the School allows parents to have access to near-by child care at a rate that is slightly cheaper than the average London nursery.

The campaign aims to lobby LSE to improve the nursery immediately, while relocating it by 2020 to one of the new buildings currently being developed by Lincolns Inn Fields. Proponents of the campaign also want the School to reconsider their business plan so it is more sustainable and cost effective for both LSE and parents who wish to use it in the future.

The protest picnic, located outside the core LSE management buildings, was made up of students and staff, but attracted a lower

turn out than was hoped for by campaign managers. Despite this, the SU has run stalls on Sheffield Street that attracted a good level of interest, with societies such as the LSESU Intersectional Feminist Society openly backing it.

The SU Women’s Officer, Lena Schofeld, released a statement noting the negative impact this will have particularly on the female members of the LSE community, saying “Cuts to childcare services affect women first and worst.”

The campaign has recently received some comments over how student timetables should be a more concerning matter in the interest of students, following a UGM proposal by Joshua Ip. However, over 850 student have signed the petition to save the nursery and the Union will certainly persist with their attempt to get the School to prioritise this vital resource.

News | 5

London Uni Roundup

Queen Mary hosted a seven-aside football tournament for five schools in Tower Hamlets on November 5th to offer the schoolchildren a chance to ask the students about university life. The Community Cup was run as a round robin tournament with teams playing each other once and taking part in games about university life when not playing. The team from Bishop Challoner School won the cup. The event was held in conjunction with QMUL’s Widening Participation scheme.

UCL professor John Hardy is the first UK winner of the $3m Breakthrough Prize in Life Sciences. He was awarded the prize for his research into the genetic causes of Alzheimer’s disease and Parkinson’s disease. Hardy gave £50,000 from the prize money to match donations towards the construction of the new Dementia Research Institute at UCL.

Theoretical physicists from Imperial College London have devised an extremely rapid heating mechanism that they believe could heat certain materials to ten million degrees – hotter than the centre of the Sun – in much less than a million millionth of a second.

The method could be relevant to new research in nuclear fusion energy. The technique, if proven experimentally, could be the fastest heating rate ever demonstrated in a lab for a significant number of particles.

If you are an LSE staff member, student or alumnus with an announcement to make then News in Brief wants to hear from you! Email news@thebeaveronline.co.uk

6

| Tuesday November 17, 2015

RAG Gets Lost Raising Money For Papyrus Megan Crockett Managing Editor

ON SATURDAY 14TH NOVEMBER, sixty two London School of Economics (LSE) students gathered outside the Saw Swee Hock ready to embark on a hitchhike back from an unknown location, all in the name of charity.

This year, RAG Gets Lost was raising money for Papyrus Prevention of Young Suicide, a charity that ‘work towards building a society which speaks openly about suicide and has the resources to help young people who may have suicidal thoughts’. So far the event has raised £4,500 in sponsorship all of which will be donated to this brilliant charity. At the time The Beaver went to print the Hiking Vikings had raised the largest amount for Papyrus, an incredible £700.

Twenty one teams of students were driven to Cromer, the home of pier of the year, with one goal: make it back to LSE for free! However, it was not that simple. Along the way teams could earn points by completing different challenges, these points would be added up and an overall winner would then be crowned.

The aforementioned challenges ranged from the achievable, for example, finding someone with an ‘amazing’ moustache, to the down right impossible, such as blagging a ride in a helicopter or getting a stranger to propose to them. Teams could also win location points, which involved them making pit stops on their way back with locations ranging from five to twenty five points. On top of the challenges, extra points were awarded

for the best fancy dress, most money raised and then finally the race back to London, with the first team back racking up an impressive forty extra points.

The first team to successfully make it back from Cromer was MA100, made up of Jasveen, Balrajan and Faisal, who had made the one hundred and thirty mile trip back in just five hours; the same time it took the RAG Hitch Officer to return using the train and arriving at RAG HQ at 4pm. The final teams, Tribute 2 Vith and Handegg Supertramps, returned to The School just after midnight, drawing a long day of persuasion, pleading and hitchhiking to an end.

The overall winning team was London Heathrow, made up of Lynne Sakr, Jessica Jourja and Riana Barrow, despite being the twelfth team to arrive back at RAG HQ , after nine hours of travelling.

The team scored an incredible 250 points after completing a large number of the challenges set, including taking a selfie with an animal, going on a date with a stranger, building a wall and wearing a policeman’s hat.

London Heathrow told The Beaver, “RAG gets lost was easily one of the best experiences of our lives. Starting at 7 am, being blindfolded and thrown into the middle of nowhere and having to find our way back into London resulted in one of the weirdest, yet incredibly eventful days ever. Luckily enough, on the first leg of our journey we met the most incredibly woman, Liz, who you could say was our guardian angel, she helped us with all our tasks and made sure we had a great time along the way.

Some moments were tough, and we wanted to give up, and thankfully

we persevered. This day taught us so many things, such as the importance of good friendships, making the most of every day and every experience and always seeking for the best in people. We would encourage anyone and everyone to do RAG gets lost, we know it’s tough, we know it’s scary, we know you’ll get frustrated along the way, but the feeling of satisfaction afterwards is like no other and makes it all the more worth it.”

RAG Gets Lost has proven to be a worthy experience for individuals within the LSE community. Liz Quigley, a member of the public, was positively affected by RAG Gets Lost when she was approached by a team asking for a lift.

Quigley took to Facebook to share her RAG Gets Lost experience, ‘when my daughter Jasmin and I picked up 3 strangers in Cromer dressed as random food stuff, who knew what adventures would ensue...My friends know that I often get my self involved with stuff when people ask for help but I felt like the recipient today as I had the best fun and laughed all the way home after I’d waved them off on the rest of their adventure, wishing I could go with the ... We met as strangers, we parted as friends.’

RAG President, James Wurr, told the Beaver, “What an incredible effort from all our teams both in terms of getting back to LSE and their fundraising. Being dropped in an unknown location is never a pleasant experience for anyone but the teams dealt with it admirably.

Their fundraising has also been out of this world with an incredible amount raised for Papyrus, a charity aimed a preventing young suicide.”

UGM Motion Fails To Reach Quoracy Kallum Pearmain Staff Writer THURSDAY 12TH NOVEMBER saw the second motion of term debated at Union General Meeting (UGM), should we support an open taxi market? Will Duffield and Peter Lyon proposed the motion while Harry Maxwell stood in opposition.

UGM kicked off with Sabb updates, with Nona Buckley-Irvine, General Secretary of the Students’ Union (SU) discussing hardship funds for international students, the HE Green Paper and its effect on tuition fees before noting that London School of Economics’ (LSE) students have queue jump rights at Saucy and that they should make the most of them.

Katie Budd, Activities and Development Officer, spoke about her continued lobbying and discussion with the School around Room Booking and has suggested societies collectively lobby the School for some sort of compensation for the problems stemming from the debacle.

Budd is also continuing her work with regards to the Arts Community at LSE with plans of holding an Arts Festival in Week 2 of Lent Term.

Aysha Fekaiki, Community and Welfare Officer, began by remarking on how well Black History Month and Herstory Week went before going on to speak of her ongoing campaign to support the LSE nursery. It has come to light that there is a lease for the nursery until 2020, so the nursery’s existence is only pulled into question after that. Fekaiki told UGM that she would continue to work to save the nursery.

Jon-Rhys Foster, Education Officer, told UGM that he is working on plans to outline what teaching rooms should look like in buildings such as

44 Lincoln’s Inn Fields. Foster noted that there are now two hundred new study spaces on the fourth floor of the library and urged students to go and have a look if they had not already.

As Foster wrapped up the Sabb reports UGM moved on to debate the motion ‘should we support an open taxi market?’. Will Duffield and Peter Lyon stood up to outline their argument. They suggested the proposed amendments to Uber such as a five minimum waiting time, a ban on displaying available cabs on the app and the call for an exact fare to be displayed prior to the journey constituted a ‘debate of principles’.

It was suggested that we are ‘trapped in a Burkian commitment to the Black Cab System’ and that the proposed regulations ‘don’t make much sense or secure any public benefit’.

A final comment was made claiming that the ‘english speaking requirement is nationalist and discriminatory’.

Harry Maxwell then took to the stand to oppose the motion stating that he agrees with the proposed regulations. Maxwell outlined how taxi drivers income is ‘going down massively’ and how these regulations help slow the process down. Maxwell told UGM that is is ‘morally right’ to try and slow down this process and we should not be acting in a way to speed up the decline of their income because we ‘cant be bothered to wait five minutes’ for a taxi. The second tail to Maxwell’s argument was that he believed our Sabbatical Officers have more important things to be doing than lobbying TFL; Maxwell noted issues around exam timetables as more worthy of Sabb attention than the way taxis are regulated.

The motion failed to reach quoracy.

Boris Johnson Condemns Petition Signed by LSE Academics Robyn Connelly Webster Undergraduate Student BORIS JOHNSON EARLIER this week accused many British academics of being ‘snaggle-toothed lefties’ who yield no real power due to their signing of a public pledge to boycott Israeli universities.

Many LSE academics have signed the pledge to have no involvement with Israeli universities until the state of Israel ends its discrimination and violence against Palestinians and the illegal occupation of Palestinian lands.

More than 300 academics have signed the joint statement and 72 British universities were represented. LSE academics David Graeber from the Department of Anthropology and John Chalcraft from the Department of Government were among them and the pledge was published as a full-page piece in the Guardian in October.

While academics will continue to work with Israeli colleagues on an individual level, they will not partake in any conferences arranged by Israeli institutions, act as referees for them or support their work in any other way.

The Mayor of London made his negative comments while in Tel Aviv with British Tech firm representatives to encourage Israeli businesses to invest and establish themselves in the capital. His outrage at the idea of an academic boycott was justified with his statement that it is ‘crazy’ to boycott the ‘only democracy in the region that has a ‘pluralist, open society’. This is a line that is frequently used by Israel and its supporters, claiming that it should be supported because it is a democratic electoral system unlike many of its neighbours in the Middle East.

This is in light of the recent outbursts of violence throughout Israel and the West Bank due to raising tensions over the treatment of Palestinian citizens and Israel’s failure to move towards a two-state solution. Both Israelis and Palestinians have been killed and the country continues to suffer with tension, aggression and insecurity. 11 Israelis have been killed since the beginning of September and 70 Palestinians have been shot dead by the Israeli military.

Of course, Johnson is known for his controversial comments.

Last year, while discussing the Gaza

war, he described himself as a ‘passionate Zionist’ after what was the most fatal year for Palestinian lives since 1967.

Yet, this has not gone unnoticed within the Palestinian community.

Meetings with a youth forum plus several other groups and charities publicly announced they would not meet with Johnson after his comments. A spokesperson for Sharek youth forum explained their decision on the basis that Johnson ‘consciously denies the reality of the occupation that continues to oppress... all Palestinians.’

Government Green Paper Says Tuition Fees Could Increase Again Kallum Pearmain Staff Writer THE UK GOVERNMENT released a new higher education Green Paper, entitled ‘Fulfilling Our Potential: Teaching Excellence, Social Mobility’ on the 6th November.

Amongst the most controversial proposals included in the Green Paper is the suggestion that Universities might be given the opportunity to raise the tuition fees they charge if they are rewarded as part of a Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) as an incentive to drive up teaching quality.

Tuition fees at English universities are currently capped at £9,000, but the new TEF scheme would result in an increase of that some universities in line with inflation. The first potential rise, following TEF1, could take place as early as 2017.

“The additional income,” the Green Paper states, “can be reinvested in the quality of teaching and allow providers to expand so that they can teach more students.”

Labour’s higher education spokesman, Gordon Marsden, said: “We will make sure the debate on teaching quality does not become a Trojan horse for fee increases or creating an apartheid in the university system between universities that teach and universities that research.”

Nona Buckley-Irvine, LSE Students’ Union’s General Secretary, appearing on Radio Five Live,

said: “What the government is doing isn’t going to increase teaching excellence. As Labour has said, it is just a Trojan horse for raising the tuition fees as they see fit.

“The question is “Is tuition fees the answer? Are universities spending their money wisely?”... I’m not sure that the government has really thought about all the options about how to fund universities.

“The £9,000 fees have been really detrimental to the number of part-time students entering higher education, the number of mature students. All of those issues around part-time and mature students have not been touched on by the Green paper that has come out.”

A letter sent by 26 academics criticizing the Green Paper’s institution of ‘market forces’ within higher education was published in the Guardian. “The proposals outlined in the green paper will make it harder for universities to deliver high-quality education for all.”

Sally Hunt, General Secretary of the Universities and College Union (UCU), said: “We have concerns about exactly what measures would be used in any TEF. Simply finding a few measures to rank teaching will do nothing to improve quality and we fear that manipulation of statistics may be the name of the game, rather than bolstering the student experience.”

The precise nature of the measures which would rank teaching quality have not yet been outlined, so it is difficult to conjecture whether LSE would qualify for the

TEF1 inflationary fee rise in 2017.

However, satisfaction amongst LSE students is consistently lower than it is at other Russell Group and highranking universities, and teaching standards contribute to this score.

LSE achieved a student satisfaction rating of 83% in the 2014 National Student Survey. This compares unfavourably with Oxford, Cambridge and Durham (91), SOAS (88), Imperial (87), and UCL (86).

Other proposals within the Green Paper include the creation of a new regulator in the sector called the Office for Students, which would “empower, protect and represent the interests of students, employers and taxpayers”.

Amongst the OfS’s statutory duties would be “A duty to promote the interests of students to ensure that the OfS considers issues primarily from the point of view of students, not providers.”

The National Union of Students’ reaction to this proposal states: “the new Office for Students must be built around the student voice. Regulation is a crucial issue, and NUS wants to see tough regulations to ensure that students are protected and receiving a high quality education.”

It added: “The paper prioritises high quality teaching, which is fundamental to the education system.

Whilst NUS believes all students should have access to high quality teaching, we oppose further rises in tuition fees and a focus on teaching should not be linked to fees.”

The Green Paper states:

“UCAS will be consulting with the sector on the feasibility of introducing name blind applications from September 2017… to help address discrimination.” LSESU’s Anti-racism officer Jasmina Bidé criticised this proposal, stating that the introduction of name-blind applications only addresses the issue superficially. “Introducing nameblind applications shows a level of commitment towards tackling the attainment gap for university places between BME students and their white counter parts. However, this alone is not sufficient to tackle the gap. Indicators such as how many extra-curricular activities students have done, personal statements, the quality of their references, and the reputation of their secondary school, carry great weight on UCAS applications, and are also largely responsible for this gap. These are all largely tied to students’ socioeconomic background, which often intersects with race.” She suggests that the government support a much more comprehensive revision of “the various unconscious biases prevalent in the application process,” apart from ensuring names remain anonymous.

Universities UK, it is announced in the Green Paper, “is setting up a social mobility advisory group in order to progress this and to build upon existing good practice,” which will report to the government later this year.

The Green Paper is open to consultation.

LSESU UN Society and Photography Society “Reimagine the World” Victoria Cheah Undergraduate Student

IN EFFORTS TO RAISE awareness for ‘Universal Children’s Day’, the LSESU United Nations Society’s Blue Dragon Outreach Initiative has collaborated with the Photography Society to present a photography competition and -exhibition, “Reimagining the World”. The photography competition received an amazing response over social media, receiving photos from those within and outside our LSE community, featuring photos sent by students in KCL and UCL. The winner of the competition was decided based on the combination of votes from a panel of judges from the Photography Society, Blue Dragon Initiative and UN Society; as well as Facebook likes. The final winning picture was submitted

by Carmelo Konmaz, titled “A Curious Mind”, whilst the winner of most popular photo was,

Benedict G. Nisperos’s “Sunset Bonding”, which received over 400 likes.

The UN Society’s Blue Dragon Outreach Initiative supports ‘Blue Dragon Children’s Foundation’ in Vietnam, a NGO that focuses on getting kids back into education, training and apprenticeships, working for the long­term benefit of children in need. They also help children and women involved in drug­ trafficking and sex­ t rafficking, saving them as well as providing them physical and mental support.

The top photos have been selected and will be displayed on the first floor promotion space in the Saw Swee Hock Centre throughout Week 8. Please do drop by during the week and admire the photographs.

As they say, “A picture is worth a thousand words.”

More information can be found on the events page:​ https://www.facebook.com/ events/1539899079633886/

News | 7

News In Brief Miliband Returns to LSE for Greece FORMER LEADER OF THE Labour Party Ed Miliband was at LSE on Tuesday night for a public lecture by the Greek Finance Minister Euclid Tsakalatos. Miliband was a picture of solemn contemplation as he sat in the front row at Hong Kong Theatre. This is not the first time that Mr Miliband, who himself graduated with a masters in economics from the School, has attended such events. Just earlier this year the MP for Doncaster North sat in on a lecture from former Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd on the rise of China.

LSE Alumni Populate Trudeau’s Revolutionary Cabinet THREE LSE ALUMNI HAVE been appointed to the cabinet of freshly elected Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.

International relations graduate Bill Morneau has been chosen as the nations latest Finance Minister, whilst fellow alumni Catherine McKenna and JeanYves Duclos have become Family, and Environment ministers respectively. Trudeau’s cabinet is the first in his nation’s history to have an equal gender makeup, with 15 men and 15 women.

He is just the latest in a long line of politically significant Trudeaus, and is the first ever son of a former PM to take on his father’s post.

New Bridget Jones Movie Filmed Across Campus STARS A PLENTY WERE seen scurrying in and around St Clement Danes Church opposite the LSE campus this week as they shot scenes for the upcoming sequel to Bridget Jones’ Diary. Both Colin Firth and Renee Zellweger were spotted by eagle eyed students who no doubt thought that was it for their dose of glitz and glam this term. Little did they know, Zellweger and Firth were mere amuse-bouches.

The arrival of, the political and journalistic behemoth that is, Jeremy Paxman on set undoubtedly signalled the arrival of the film’s star attraction.

8 | Tuesday November 17, 2015

Value For Our Student Fees?

Why is student satisfaction overlooked in LSE managers’ pay packages?

Mali Williams Comment Editor

Comment

Section Editor: Mali Williams Deputy Editors: Nina Webb Dina Nagapetiants Hakan Ustabas

‘THE SHAMELESS GREED of university fat cats is exposed’ wrote the Mail last week. In case you missed it, our very own Director, Craig Calhoun (with pint in hand) made the Mail’s higher education rich list.

The Mail uncovered through Freedom of Information requests – yes, the instrument that the government seems to be trying to curtail – that university managers earned up to £600,000 last year. At the LSE, 178 staff members earned over £100,000, 30 of them took home more than £200,000, and two made more than £300,000. Other than Calhoun, LSE apparently withheld the names and job titles of the four top-earners at LSE. The Mail also reported that Calhoun spent £60,000 last year on flights, almost all of which were business class; that he received a pension contribution of £49,000; £18,000 in benefits, for medical insurance, phone bills, and so on; and all of this on top of his £327,000 salary.

With students spending thousands of pounds a year to receive an LSE education, and feeling the pinch with rising London rents; with staff and lecturers on modest salaries suffering a pay drought over last few years; and with the cleaning and catering staff being treated appallingly due to contract

changes, I cannot be the only one who feels somewhat sour at reading these figures.

“I imagine most students feel the fundamental criteria for such a job... is caring about students. This does not in itself justify paying out £400,000 a year.”

According to the LSE, Calhoun’s £394,000 pay package is ‘appropriate’ for such a job, and he flies in business class in order to work during and immediately after flying. I am slightly baffled by this particular rebuttal; surely I am not alone in having successfully written an essay whilst hunched in a Megabus seat, with a man with bad breath to my left and a crying baby in the seat behind. One would expect economy to be the standard class of flying for those working within public institutions, and that if an upgrade is needed in order to ‘work’ then that upgrade ought to be paid out of the passenger’s own pocket (rather than, say, potential scholarship funds). With regard to the ‘appropriateness’ of such a high salary, I imagine that most students feel the fundamental criteria for such a job within higher education is not being a globe-trotter, but

rather, is caring about education, caring about the School, and caring about students. This does not in itself justify paying out £400,000 a year.

Though, it could be worse. Former head of London Metropolitan University, which came 216th (out of 216) in The Complete University Guide, earned £618,000 last year, according to the Mail.

Still, it is right for us students to question the amount being spent on managerial staff here; we are, after all, paying for a portion of it.

Despite this, students at the LSE do not feel the value for money of an education. In the 2015 National Student Survey, LSE’s student satisfaction scores came five points below the national average, and six points below other Russell Group institutions. Moreover, there was also a worrying disparity in the student satisfaction figures for equality and diversity, for instance, dyslexic students, BME students, and female students are even less satisfied. This is not news. However, so far this academic year, there seems to have been very little effort to address the issue.

The truth is that Higher Education bosses have been transformed into CEOs. Yet, CEOs remain accontable to their shareholders and customers. We do not see the same degree of accountability at the LSE. It is quite clear that the performance appraisals of topearners at the LSE do not seem to

include the satisfaction of students as a whole. Whatever happened to tuition fees turning students into customers, and the customer being king?

“Whatever happened to tuition fees turning students into customers, and the customer being king?”

This latest episode of salary exposure, in light of abysmal student satisfaction scores, has further emphasised the need to re-evaluate the importance of students within the institution. We are, after all, the heart of the LSE. Though, as an aside, it did strike me as rather ironic that the Daily Mail lambasted the ‘shamless fat cats’ of education. This is the paper whose own editor, Paul Dacre, reportedly when faced with editorial budget cuts, rather than cut his own salary - 2.4m last year - has instead sacked long-serving journalists with up to 35 years of experience with the paper, and has warned columnists to expect a 15% pay cut when their contracts are renewed. The words pot, kettle, and black spring to mind. Perhaps the Daily Mail ought to keep an eye on the cream of its own fat cats, as well as exposing those within the public sector.

A Good Start, But Not The End

Thoughts on last week’s ‘Homophobia and Sexism in Sport’ panel event Perdita Blinkhorn Collective Chair

“YOU SHOULD NEVER HAVE to choose between being who you are and playing the sport you love.”

These were the words of world famous rugby referee, Nigel Owen, last Tuesday night as he gave a speech at a panel discussion hosted

by LSE AU Men’s Rugby club on the topic of homophobia and sexism in sport. The event, co-hosted by the Athletics Union and the LSE Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Taskforce, aimed to dispel the hostile connotations surrounding women and the LGBT+ community associated with LSE sport following last year’s men’s rugby-gate.

The event was generally well received. Many were brought to near tears by Owen’s talk on how he came to terms with being gay, and were given an exceptional insight into the world of female sports journalists and the sexism they face daily by Kate Rowan. I was delighted to meet the outstanding front row player, Clare Purdy, a key force in the England Women’s rugby team’s 2010 World Cup success, as well as the woman behind the ‘This

Girl Can Campaign’. In fact, I was quite amazed at the panel line-up that the organisers had managed to assemble and the many #LSErugbyforall pinging around social media seemed to prove I was not alone in that feeling.

“For possibly the first time, they had gained an insight into how it felt to be gay or a woman in the world of sports.”

Before the event kicked off, I found myself feeling rather anxious. I realised that this was because this event had to be excellent to work. The people in the room were staff and students, but most were a part of an LSE Sports club, some of the very people I find it hardest to engage with in my role in the LGBT+ Alliance. This event had to be good as this may be the only chance we would have to get them in a room together and listen specifically to women and LGBT+ in sport talk about how important it was to recognise problems and actively deal with them.

And, generally speaking, I was not disappointed. The students who were there, who had never really engaged in a similar discussion before - not because they weren’t “supportive” but because the issues didn’t directly affect them - were genuinely moved by what they heard. For possibly the first time, they had a gained a true insight into how it felt to be gay or a woman in the world of sports.

However, if you’ve read any of my articles before, you will know that there’s usually a but. In this case, I do not say it to criticise the event directly or the huge amount of hard work I know went into this event, particularly by AU President, Julia Ryland, and Men’s Rugby Outreach Officer, Tom Carmichael, who worked tirelessly to ensure a positive outcome. I feel this however is necessary, so that the fantastic work that went into this night is not lost, but built upon.

So, however much the event was enjoyed by all, there were definitely a number of improvements many felt could have been made. While Owens’ name not only brought a lot of people to the event, and he himself is an excellent speaker who could have had an event to himself,

he certainly dominated the discussion and left little time for the other fantastic panellists to speak.

It would have, in my opinion, been wonderful to hear more about the sexism side of the event as it did seem disproportionately skewed to Nigel’s experiences.

“However much the event was enjoyed by all, there were definitely a number of improvements many felt could be made.”

In future, it would also be refreshing to hear more about the experience of queer females and trans* people in sport, as well as the issues sports teams can perpetuate outside of their club. Many people who are LGBT+ can feel comfortable around their team-mates, but this doesn’t stop casual homophobia and transphobia being felt from those outside sport. I would summarise this panel as an excellent start, but the effort put into this event cannot slip if this campaign is to have a successful future.

End The Corporate Sponsorships Of Our LSE Student Societies

Why we should think twice about accepting money from strangers Julia Slupska Undergraduate Student WHEN THE EXECUTIVE of the LSESU Hypothetical Society (the society name is changed to protect us from corporate sponsor wrath) announced that we had secured several hefty sponsorships for this year (the first in many sponsorship-dry years for us Hypotheticals), I (and, I suspect, the rest of the committee) thought “Yay, free money!” and moved on to the next item on the newsfeed.

However, having thought about it some more, I think these sponsorships, which bind us contractually to an unlimited amount of corporate brand spam, are both limiting our society’s freedom of expression and making us unwittingly participate in a harmful wider trend.

Both the Hypotheticals and other student societies should think more carefully before signing up to them in the future.

Graduate-hungry consultancies and investment banks are constantly looking to further their presence on campus. Traditionally, this involved Careers Fairs or hiring one poor soul to spam, post, and flier their heart out on campus, but increasingly these firms are using student societies to maximise and specialise their message. Student societies with large email lists and Facebook followings (as well

as more employable members) are especially attractive, and even occasionally get offered sponsorships without having to apply for them.

It is easy to understand why societies apply for these sponsorships so eagerly: every society wants to organise more events at lower costs to members. However most committee members fail to consider how this develops financial dependency: the traditional source of income for

“Most committee members fail to consider how this develops financial dependency... ironically, this makes us even more dependent on sponsorships.” student societies has always been the LSE Annual Fund. However, in order to apply for the LSE Annual Fund, societies must report how much they get from outside sponsorships. If the Hypotheticals get a corporate windfall this year, we are likely diminishing the level of Annual Fund money we get next year: ironically, this makes us even more dependent on sponsorships.

While this may be convenient for the School, it is a shame for soci-

eties, as Annual Fund money does not come with any skeazy strings attached.

First of these skeazy strings is, spam and self-policing. At the moment when societies get sponsorship money, they also acquire a headache-inducing many-paged legally-enforceable contract, which is often not read by members of the committee outside the executive. This contract leads to the constant worry of “upholding our relationship with the sponsor:” It is a euphemism for mass outpour of corporate recruitment events and branding in newsletters and Facebook pages. Recent hypothetical newsletters have included more content (by word count) describing job opportunities from our sponsors than describing hypothetical activities. It also involves self-policing: our president even removed a picture of two Hypotheticals sharing a rather self-congratulatory kiss from the Facebook page without consulting with the committee, ostensibly terrified that this might offend the all-seeing sponsors. While most Hypotheticals would probably agree that our page should be for our friends and members rather than our sponsors, it is easy for committee members to slip into prioritizing the latter over the former. This does not extend only to silly social media quibbles: say, hypothetically, we wanted to host a panel discussion on corporate sponsorship of student societies – a relevant and contentious topic – we would simply be unable to do so for fear of jeopardizing our “relationship with the sponsor.”

“Many students choose internships and graduate jobs in these careers, not because they have made a rational calculation... but simply because it seems like the done thing to do at the LSE.”

The second of these skeazy strings is indoctrination. In my opinion, one of the more sensible ideas that came out of Occupy LSE last year was that the prevalence of corporate law, consultancies, investment banking and the like on Houghton Street, Facebook, and your society newsletter send a subtle but constant message that this very small subset of career paths is a norm that one has to deviate from. Many students choose internships and graduate jobs in these careers, not because they

have made a rational calculation that this is the kind of paycheck, subject matter, and work environment that they want, but simply because it seems like the done thing to do at the LSE. Conversely, students interested in any other career are pushed to justify why they need to seek something out of the norm. One might respond that corporate sponsorship isn’t really aimed at students deciding in between philanthropy and working in the City: it’s more likely to convince someone who’s already interested in banking to apply to Barclays. While this may be true, I don’t think anyone is entirely immune from the constant subliminal messaging outlined above.

Pointing this out does not necessarily mean you think investment banking or financial services are illegitimate careers paths: they are obviously very fulfilling and lucrative for many people. However, it also seems fairly uncontentious that a bright young graduate who chooses one of them will, statistically speaking, be less likely to benefit society at large than a bright young graduate who goes into most other career paths. Consequently, an action which pushes that indecisive graduate from choosing say, a career in public service or environmental law, to one where they will be making risky financial investments is arguably an action that has made the world (if not necessarily that graduate) slightly worse off. Society sponsorship is not the only thing that contributes to this wider phenomenon, but if your society is going to perpetuate a certain message via constant Facebook and email updates, you should probably at least have a discussion about whether this is a message you truly want to endorse.

When I raised these issues with the Hypotheticals, I was told we’d already signed the contract so it was too late, and anyway the annual SU budgeting format means we have no assurance that we can support our activities in the future, so corporate sponsors are our only option. I think there are other options: fundraising, cost-cutting, lobbying the school for more reliable funding sources, or negotiating harder when the next sponsorship proposal is sent out. All these options require time and effort: scarce commodities among beleaguered committee members. But I think at the very least, our society’s (and your society’s) approach should be to do the minimum possible while fulfilling explicit contractual obligations. And let’s not rush to become conveyor belts for corporate propaganda without weighing the financial benefits against the many harms.

Comment | 9

‘The Final Nail In The Coffin’ The LSESU General Secretary on the government’s Higher Education Green Paper

Nona Buckley-Irvine LSESU General Secretary THE HIGHER EDUCATION Green Paper is the final nail in the coffin for the marketisation of Higher Education. While the narrative dresses up the bill as being in the interests of students, the linking of the ‘teaching excellence framework’ to tuition fees is going to develop a range of perverse incentives and a potential ability for universities to game the system in order to raise fees. The teaching excellence framework will stifle innovation and seems to be incredibly focussed on graduate employment, which never has , and never will, be the primary purpose of Higher Education.

Furthermore, the paper talks about widening participation in the broadest sense but actually, there is little mention of mature and part-time students who traditionally fit into the widening participation category. It is also hard to see how a government can be supposedly committed to wider participation while cutting maintenance grants.

Lastly, while this won’t affect the LSE hugely, the Bill is looking to centralise power over the distribution of teaching grants by giving it to the Secretary of State. This is a disturbing politicisation of education.

In all, we should be seriously worried about the direction the government is heading with our higher education system. Teaching and fees should in no way be linked, and access to education is seriously endangered by this.

Do you agree?

Tweet @BeaverOnline or email

comment@thebeaveronline.co.uk

10| Tuesday Novemeber 17, 2015

From The ‘Third Intifada’ To A Void

How the media has manipulated our views of the Israel-Palestine conflict this year Francesca Bucchi Postgraduate Student IT WAS SEPTEMBER WHEN news of sporadic clashes between Palestinians and Israelis began to reach the Western audience. Only in the following month, however, did the media start unifying all these more and more frequent events under a common umbrella term: ‘third intifada.’ The accuracy of such a labelling is definitely hard to ascertain, yet it most certainly succeeded in achieving its goal.

For few weeks, all eyes were pointed towards Israel and the confusion reigning there. News of stabbings and skirmishes was on televisions, radios, and the Internet almost every day.

The case of Ahmed Manasrah, a Palestinian child of 13 who got wounded while attacking some Israelis, became the epitome of the violence from both sides. Every small occurrence was covered and everything was framed in order to fit the greater discourse of the never-ending conflict between Israel and Pal-

estine.

What now? Since the beginning of November, news of the situation in Israel and Palestine has become more and more rare in media outlets. Everything else in the Middle East seemed to acquire secondary importance when the news of the tragic plane crash in Egypt reached the Western audience. Quietly, the ghosts of Palestinians and Israelis were relegated once again to a corner, waiting for their voices to find a new means to escape their cyclical oblivion. In a matter of just few weeks, the ‘third intifada’ was simply no more.

“Since the beginning of November, news of the situation in Israel and Palestine has become more and more rare in media outlets.”

This article is not meant to take sides. In the case of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, that would be just too easy. Instead, the present piece is intended

“This article is not meant to take sides.

In the case of the Israel-Palestine conflict, that would be just too easy.” to bring some awareness to the reader, making him or her mindful of the lenses through which the media have often framed the conflict for us. To notice this, one just needs to look at all the (pretentious) concern the word ‘intifada’ aroused in the Western public just one month ago. For a moment, the image of Palestinian kids throwing stones at Israeli soldiers must have crossed everyone’s mind. For a moment, it was 1987 or 2000 all over again. For a moment. Just for a moment.

As the media stopped covering the situation in Israel, the Western audience stopped caring. Obviously, journalists cannot deal with every single killing in the area. That would just be humanly impossible. Yet, what

the media can try to do is avoid the inflation of news with the exploitation of concepts stolen from (grievous) historical legacies. The reason is simple: although this very manipulation may indeed serve the immediate goal of attracting an enormous audience, with time, it will make that same audience completely apathetic. And when dealing

with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, this is something that must be avoided at all costs. After all, the Palestinians and Israelis who have died since the beginning of October (the number was up to 87 on the 9th of November, according to Aljazeera) do not deserve to return to dust, like the idea of the ‘third intifada’ did.

The Memory Of Mrs Thatcher Lives On Everything She Wants: Charles Moore’s lecture encapsulated the Iron Lady’s legacy Hakan Ustabas Deputy Comment Editor AS I TOOK MY SEAT OVER half an hour before the start of the lecture in the Sheikh Zayed Theatre, it became clear to me that arriving early had been a necessity. Dozens of people were already seated, and hundreds were pouring in behind me. By the time of the speech, the Theatre was entirely packed; full of people eager to hear the much respected views of Charles Moore regarding a much respected Prime Minister.

Moore, the renowned journalist and official biographer of the lady in question, affectionately referred to her as “Mrs Thatcher” throughout.

His lecture highlighted not just specific policies, of which some were controversial, but the character and respect which made the first ever female world leader worthy of a place in history.

During the lecture, he focused on a single week which he felt demonstrated some of the many strengths of Mrs Thatcher. Her ability to strike relationships with fierce heads of state, despite being the only female, was a feat for her

time. During the international calamity of the Cold War, it was she who maintained firm between the global superpowers of Russia, China, and the United States. Moore recalls her unrivalled ability to assert the British agenda on a global scale by gaining the trust and respect of the leaders of the free and the communist worlds alike.

“During the lecture, he focused on a single week which he felt demonstrated some of the many strengths of Mrs Thatcher.”

While Mrs Thatcher was held in contempt by certain groups in the country, it is undoubtable that her neoliberal economics appealed to the wider electorate. During her tenure, she transformed the economy from a stagnant mess into a productive superpower.

Through the revolution of the tax system, privatisation, and supply-side economic policy, Britain is still feeling the longterm benefits today. And to those who complained about

increasing inequality, well they “would rather the poor were poorer, provided the rich were less rich.” She left office sound in the knowledge that living standards had increased across all groups in the country during her time.

Mention must be made to Mrs Thatcher’s road to premiership, as well as her time there. While the current Conservative Party is by no means as diverse in terms of class and gender as it should be, the situation was far worse in the 1970s. Her rise to the top was one of fierce internal battles between the progressive liberals on the one hand, and the

“In the heart of the LSE, between the noise of anti-government and anti-cut campaigns, people who share an undying respect for Mrs Thatcher can still be found.”

Tory ‘wets’ on the other. It was this, rather than a rejection by the public, which led to her eventual resignation.

In light of her strength in leading the country, her elec-

tion successes, and her noble rise to the top, I despair when I hear the gravest of insults thrown at a person who is no longer with us. Mrs Thatcher was loyal to her ideology — her revolutionary vision — and genuinely wanted to better the lives of everyone who was willing to work for it. Slander seems to be passed from one generation of the populist left to the next, without much thought for why it is said. The immaturity and ignorance of such ‘protestors’ was established when ‘Ding Dong! The Witch is Dead’ rose to second place in the charts following her death in 2013.

For me, Charles Moore’s most poignant and yet oddly refreshing point, was when he said that Mrs Thatcher is either respected or loved the world over; only in the UK is she hated. It is sad to think that members of the nation which she served are the only people who genuinely hate her.

And yet, it is refreshing in that if we step back, and look from a global perspective, the other powers of the world recognise Mrs Thatcher’s rightful place in history.

Once the lecture had completed, a roar of applause filled the lower floor of the

New Academic Building. It seemed to simply continue on and on, showing no sign of faltering as Moore climbed the steps to the exit. I was pleased to find that in the heart of the LSE, between the noise of anti-government and anticut campaigns, hundreds of people who share an undying respect for Mrs Thatcher can still be found.

It remains to be seen whether the Conservative Party will move further into the centreground, or use their wider base of support to enable them to return to a more Thatcherite ideological position following the leadership election.

Much of that will depend on the next Conservative leader, the economy, and whether the leader of the opposition is still unelectable.

Since the election of Jeremy Corbyn, there has been a sharp increase of noise made by the populist left. Once again, Mrs Thatcher’s name is dragged through the mud. If I can conclude one certainty from Moore’s lecture, however, it is that whether the left like it or not, the impact which our long-standing Prime Minister has had on this country is here to stay. She will never be forgotten.

Comment | 11

Paris Terrorist Attacks And Social Media

In light of Paris, we should not forget all the other victims of terrorism across the world Nina Webb Deputy Comment Editor AS I’M SURE YOU’VE ALL heard, on Friday in the French capital a wave of tragic terrorist attacks by eight armed gunmen was unleashed, killing roughly 129 people. On Saturday, the Islamic State claimed responsibility for the attacks, in a video circulated via the Internet stating that ‘eight brothers wearing explosive belts and carrying assault rifles’ carried out the attacks on ‘carefully chosen targets’ (although it is almost impossible to access the video or even a transcript of the video in any language, this is could simply be the result of the heavy encryption of ISIS media platforms). This has resulted in the declaration of a state of emergency in France – and an ensuing emotional frenzy on the part of the Western press and social media. The situation, like the death of any one person, is indeed a tragedy, and pretty frightening, and my heart goes out to the families of all of those affected. But why should the deaths of certain people, especially in the eyes of Western media and social media, be seen as more important than others?

“Why should the deaths of certain people, especially in the eyes of Western media, be seen as more important than others?”

What the media fails to address is the fact that this number of people die in war-torn LEDCs every day – in some areas, maybe even more. Think about it: when do we ever hear the numbers of casualties from Syria, from the Ukraine anymore? (The first result I got when I searched “Ukraine” in Google News was an article by the Guardian about the Ukraine vs Slovenia football match). These crises are still ongoing, as they have been for years now – but for some reason, we never hear about the fact that more than 200,000 people have been killed in Syria since its civil war began, 3,000 have died in the resulting refugee crisis which was made up of a majority of Syrians, and 8,000 have died in the Donetsk region of Ukraine since the beginning of 2014.

In the case of Syria, although

the official line in this country is that the West, particularly the US, has been bombing ISIS, they fail to mention the number of civilian casualties incurred as a result of Western bombs, and how extensively civilian lives have been disrupted. Whilst governments and media in the West have been trying to construct what is very much an “Us vs. Them” situation, i.e. the West vs ISIS, it must not be forgotten that ISIS is not synonymous with Syria or Iraq. ISIS is representative of only a handful of extremists. Most Syrian civilians are not represented by the views of ISIS, and they should be treated as victims of bombs and attacks just as people in the West are. Their deaths should not be treated as any less important than Western ones, and should receive equal coverage. It angers me that simply because France is a ‘First World’ country, our people sympathise with her so much more, when in some countries, the population has to deal with such atrocities almost every single day.

Trawling through the news on Saturday afternoon, it really was difficult to find anything else to write about. If it wasn’t a story on Paris, which I tried to avoid when I headed to the UK section of the BBC, it was a story about a Briton

being amongst the dead in Paris, or it was a story about the evacuation of Gatwick Airport due to a gun being found on a French man. Unsurprisingly, ‘breaking news’ linked the story about ISIS and Paris to another of the mainstream media’s pet hates: the refugee crisis, as it was detailed that one of the terrorists was a Syrian refugee, according to a Greek government official. Therefore, again, rather than sympathising with their plight, the media served only to spread further hatred for the refugee crisis, and for Syrians – simply because of one bad egg, amongst thousands that need our help.

“Rather than sympathising with their plight, the media served only to spread further hatred for the refugee crisis.”

Social media has been even more caught up in this emotional frenzy. No disrespect to the people doing it, but changing your Facebook profile picture to the same one of you with a French flag filter over it is not going to stop interna-

tional terrorism. Nor is tweeting “#PrayforParis” (which, if you really have to tweet something along these lines, should at least be #PrayFortheWorld). Although, on the part of some, these are nice gestures for spreading solidarity, sadly, like most social media phenomena, the above actions are done by many simply for likes and retweets, without any real meaning behind them; without many of the people even knowing the full story. And it’s perfectly possible to pray for these people and keep them in your thoughts, without publishing this all over social media.

When Australian actress Ruby Rose tweeted an all-encompassing tweet that read, ‘Today has been devastating. #lebanon #paris #syria and everywhere under attack right now. this is not a blanket post this is a post for today’s horrific news which spans many countries’ she faced an intense media backlash, accusing her of ‘taking away from Paris’ rather than actually making a valid point.

There is bad news everywhere.

Just because Paris was on that day the only Western city under attack, that did not mean it was the only city under threat in the world – and (social) media should not portray it so.

The Darker Side For Refugees In Germany Germany, often heralded as a role model in the refugee crisis, also has a pernicious sect Paula Grabosch Undergraduate Student IN THE MIDST OF THE refugee crisis, Germany has often been prized as the role model.

Looking at the facts and figures, it accepts more refugees than any other country in Europe and both the state, as well as nongovernmental organisations, are providing immense support for the incoming refugees. But is the country really all that tolerant?

What about the German people themselves?

As a German, I experienced a huge outpouring of compassion towards the refugees, especially over the summer. With more volunteers than organisations can possibly register, as well as an overload of donations of clothing, food and toys, the majority of German citizens have been acting in the only right way: welcoming.

However, on an almost daily basis, mass xenophobic protests have been making headlines. The most prominent German anti-Islamistic movement, Pegida, which stands for ‘Patriotic Europeans Against the Islamisation of the Occident’, originally formed in February of this year. By exploiting the increasingly worsening

situation of IS terrorist activities as grounds to encourage hostility towards Islam, the movement relentlessly continues to fight German immigration policy. Evidently, the influx of refugees concerns German immigration policy, meaning protests have continued as a result of the refugee crisis.

“On an almost daily basis, mass xenophobic protests have been making headlines.”

One would think that these protests are largely unpopular, but shockingly, Pegida has gained an overwhelming amount of support, particularly in the East of Germany. Just last week, the number of participants in the weekly Pegida demonstration in Dresden reached a new high of 11,000 participants.

Contrary to the general consensus of Germany’s ‘role-model’ image in the refugee crisis, the protestors call for an end to the country’s ‘self-destruction’ and demand Merkel’s resignation.

On top of that, Pegida’s hate towards the usually oh-so-popular Merkel escalated in a recent demonstration when one participant

‘hung’ a sign saying ‘Reserved for Mummy Merkel’ from a gallowslike construction. Needless to say this image is extremely violent, but even more perverse is the use of the word ‘Mummy Merkel’. This term has been used by refugees to describe the motherly figure Germany’s Chancellor has become as a result of taking them in. That this loving name can be reverted into something so violent is sickening.

Following a huge wave of shock and outrage in Germany, the State Attorney of Dresden then began investigating this case, trying to find the person responsible for the sign. In doing so, he found himself at the receiving end of death threats stating: ‘you’re next’.

The hate does not end there.

Instead, it now goes beyond verbal threats. Germany’s Federal Criminal Police Office only just announced that so far in 2015 there have been 461 violent acts against refugee accommodations. These acts range from groups of 30 men beating up 3 Syrian refugees with baseball bats (as last week in Magdeburg, in Saxony), to explosives being thrown into refugee accommodations, burning them down and severely injuring the inhabitants.

In addition, the violence has spread from attacking refugees to

even attacking supporters of welcoming immigration policy. Two weeks ago, the mayor of the third

“Pegida’s hate towards the oh-so-popular Merkel escalted in a recent demonstration when one participant hung a sign saying ‘Reserved for Mummy Merkel’ from a gallows-like construction.” largest German city, Cologne, was stabbed whilst campaigning in a farmer’s market in the city centre on a Saturday morning. The attacker testified to having stabbed the mayor on xenophobic grounds, as part of her work included the registration and accommodation of refugees. Whilst this attack may be an isolated case, the build-up of violence and tension towards the refugee crisis in Germany cer-

tainly is not. Despite the majority of western countries, as well as the majority of the German population, supporting Merkel in her handling of the crisis, there is a growing minority of German citizens that does not.

With an increasing influx of refugees and hence an increasing demand for refugee accommodation, the crisis becomes more and more visible in Germany. Almost every city now accommodates refugees, with school’s sports halls and empty private-owned buildings being used to function as temporary housing for refugees. One can only hope that being directly confronted with the situation and the refugees themselves, people will see that they are also just people and not a threat. The most important thing to remember is that it is only by chance that we are not the people being forced to leave everything behind and risk our lives to save ourselves and our families. If we were, how would we feel if we were ‘welcomed’ in this way?

Do you agree?

Tweet @BeaverOnline or email

comment@thebeaveronline.co.uk

12| Tuesday November 17, 2015

rag gets lost Edward Bond The Naked Ramblers

The Union

HEARD OF CROMER? NO? Wouldn’t worry, the most exciting thing that’s happened to that tiny Norfolk seaside (not sure it qualifies as a town) settlement is the arrival of twenty one teams of lost LSE students on Saturday’s cold, windy morning. For us, the Naked Ramblers, the journey back to London cost ten and a half hours, but not a single penny.

Perhaps we came into this too naively, but after more than two hours stuck with a sign at the side of the road in Cromer, we started to become slightly concerned. To be fair, seventy students in costumes, including an army of Minions, a pumpkin, a Christmas tree, Hogwarts’ famous three, Batman and a few Vikings, aren’t exactly in keeping with North Norfolk’s usual tourists. For us, just as hope seemed lost, and with all the cookies gone, we caught our first hitch of the day to North Walsham with two charity workers in a van. And so our journey began.

North Walsham brought us Paul who, trying to be consoling, presented one of many worldly advice tips “Its gotta be a Norwich thing… This place is weird.” Full of hope of getting a lift at Norwich International Airport, our spirits were again crushed as we wandered around an empty terminal, with no incoming flights for hours.

The kind Park and Ride bus driver who then took us to the city centre for free assured us that kind and charitable people do exist. Nonetheless, the most challenging part of the day was definitely the four or five hours we spent in Norwich city centre.

We arrived in Norwich full of optimism, ready to complete some of the challenges we’d been set for the day. Two proposals, a handstand and an autograph later, the day was looking up (though no brighter). We were soon reminded

of the uncharitable nature of certain individuals, such as the Chestnut vendor who dismissed us before we could even ask for a free sample, and the guys who felt the need to drive past us twice just to inquire as to “what the ****” we thought we were doing. This is not to mention Norwich’s ‘Street Poet’ who likewise made the effort to abuse us on two occasions for not listening to his hardcore rapping. Perhaps his greatest moment was requesting of Alex and Jess whether they were spending time with an “arrogant”, “short little geezer” by choice or by force. The jury’s still out on that one.

Having unknowingly stood on the side of the road heading north out of Norwich with a sign for ‘London’ for an hour, it got dark and we got disheartened. Our whiteboard and pens destroyed from the rain, we headed to Norwich Bus Station to down a packet of chocolate Digestives and rethink. With the arrival of Dilan and Ciaran we regained motivation and went for one last attempt to catch a hitch, on the right road this time, with a scribbled sign and a tiny bike light.

Somehow the universe was on our side as we were saved from the rain and potential hypothermia by our long-haired, foul-mouthed trucker Angus. Though this may or may not have been his name and promised us that had he seen our costumes he would have merely flicked us the bird, yelled “haha ****ers” and driven off, he did drive us all the way to Covent Garden. Our knight in shining armour.

Saturday was a day of losing and gaining faith in people. From the frail old ladies who helped us with directions and gave us pound coins, to the people who looked at us as if we wanted to steal their children and see the world burn, we experienced the range of charity England has to offer.

And so it was, we got lost, found help, and made it home. Still can’t believe the last bit.

Arts degree English degree

History degree

Your degree is just the start

Our training & development programmes are designed to help you learn the most from an outstanding variety of work

Science degree

Geography degree

A career that takes you places Work in: Actuarial Assurance Consulting Deals PwC Legal Tax Technology

We welcome all degree subjects at PwC. In fact last year, almost half our graduate recruits had degrees in arts & humanities, science, law or social sciences. Surprised?

Don’t be. We see your degree as just the start. The foundation to providing help to take your career in all sorts of directions – from accounting to consulting and tax to technology. You need to be passionate about business and we’ll provide an environment where you can learn, grow and excel in your career.

Join PwC – we’re focused on helping you reach your full potential.

Take the opportunity of a lifetime pwc.com/uk/careers

/pwccareersuk @pwc_uk_careers © 2015 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. All rights reserved.

Create value through diversity.

Be yourself, be different.

14 | Tuesday November 17, 2015

Clockwise from above:

Photo

LSESU Rugby Team Captains with the Panel at the ‘Tackling Sexism and Homophobia in Rugby’ Event (photo by Daniel Cayford), our City Editor, Alex Gray, taking part in LSESU Sociology and Social Justice’s Mental Health Awareness Campaign, students show their support for refugees via LSESU Amnesty International’s campaign, LSE Students gather outside the NAB on Monday 16th November for a minute of silence in memory of the lives lost in the Paris Attacks, Members of the AU enjoying the AU Toga Party on Wednesday 11th November (photo by Michael J Needham)

9,100 50% of our graduate opportunities are based outside of London

In London, salaries are % higher on average, than other cities, but you pay 60% more to live there

33

We don’t

look at

UCAS

tariff for our graduate roles

clients are based across offices outside of London, and this represents 2/3 rds of our client list

68% of all 2015 promotions were outside London

Our regional practices are at the heart of PwC

We welcome all degree disciplines

Internship opportunities •Summer internships •Business insight weeks •Career open days •Talent academies •Diversity in business •Undergraduate work placements •Graduate work placements

A career that takes you places The digital age is here. It has been for a while. Technology impacts almost every aspect of our lives. From the way schools and universities educate, how we interact socially, how we store information, to how we shop; it’s simply the way the modern world operates. And it’s a world that’s bursting with opportunities. Businesses are pushed to innovate and develop faster, be more agile and creative than ever before. This gives us the chance to show our clients the kind of opportunities that are out there and how technology can give them a competitive edge.

If technology excites you and you want to be at the forefront of new IT initiatives and explore emerging technologies and trends, this could be just the career for you.

We look for people who are motivated by a sense of achievement, have a unique passion for what they’re doing and the ambition to go above and beyond. The range and variety of career opportunities we have is extensive – from Consulting to Tax; Assurance to Legal; and Technology to Actuarial – and our businesses welcome applications from people who don’t have business or financerelated degrees. In fact, 50% of our graduate intake studied non-business related subjects. Instead, we focus on whether someone can bring the kind of skills that will create value for our clients and lead to success in their career. Our roles aren’t just limited to London – over half of our graduate jobs are regional and just like London, they have high-profile and diverse clients.

So whichever sector you’re interested in, and in whichever part of the country you’d like to be, we have a huge number of opportunities on offer.

Take the opportunity of a lifetime pwc.com/uk/careers

© 2015 PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP. All rights reserved.

16 | Tuesday 17 November, 2015

LITERATURE

14

READING LIST

POLITICAL FICTION Camila Arias Buritica

TERM IS WELL ON ITS WAY NOW, AND YOU’RE PROBABLY THINKING THE SAME THING THAT I AM. WHAT TIME DO I HAVE TO BE READING fiction, when my actual reading list is so long that I can’t even consider the possibility of finishing it? Well, I’m here to remind you that not only is fiction here to distract us, but it can also help us better understand real-life issues. You probably know about To Kill A Mockingbird, Brave New World and 1984 by now, so here is a list of other books that might interest you and see the world around you a little differently. After all, journals and statistics are not the only lens through which to view the world. None of them are too long, so you can easily fit them around your studies, and their political subject matters are always relevant.

THE PLAGUE

MY REVOLUTIONS

THE RELUCTANT FUNDAMENTALIST

Albert Camus’ dystopian novel is based in a town dealing with an outbreak of a deadly disease. This is generally agreed to be a symbol for the Nazi occupation of France during World War II, but it nevertheless remains relevant with its story of fear in the face of a destructive intruder. Camus wrote in a separate essay that materialism had become a plague in our society. Clearly, The Plague is an exploration of all types of ‘plagues’ in society, political and moral, and how we respond to them.

Hari Kunzru’s novel is about a fifty-year old man who has been hiding his past as a radical student in the 1960s and 1970s, setting off bombs around London whilst protesting against the Vietnam War, from his family and friends. He does this perfectly well until he is forced to flee. This novel shows you about the radical idealism of the sixties, and the protagonist even happens to have been a student at the LSE, so why not give it a go?

Mohsin Hamid’s novel is told from the point of view of Changez in a café in Lahore, where he tells the story of his life to a nervous American. His story starts with his becoming a student at Princeton University, and he recalls his life as a financial analyst and his success in this career, only to be halted by the 9/11 attacks. The style of this book flows so well that you’ll speed through the pages with no concept of time, and you’ll be engrossed in this captivating narrative of American culture, patriotism and radicalism.

part

B

PartB

Flo Edwards Kemi Akinboyewa Vikki Hui

editorial team fashion

film

Jamie Lloyd Maria Maleeva

Sarah Ku Tom Sayner

music Rob Funnell Will Locke

food & lifestyle

literature

Alexander Lye Camila Arias Caroline SchurmanBuritica Grenier technology theatre visual arts

Edward Tan

Noah D’Aeth

Hanna Lee Yo-en Chin

VISUAL ARTS

17

THE OTHER ART FAIR Yo-en Chin LAST SUNDAY, I MADE MY way to The Other Art Fair hosted at the Old Truman Brewery in Shoreditch. As soon as I stepped into the hallway and the bright neon green sign was in sight, I knew that it would be amazing.

The upcoming The Other Art Fair is in April 8th to 10th next year at Victoria House. If you appreciate art and want to get a fairly affordable piece, I highly recommend going for anafternoon.

The 10th edition of The Other Art Fair boasted a record 135 artists trying to make a name for themselves in the daunting city of London.

Carefully hand-picked by the committee, the fair created a platform for these emerging artists to launch their artwork and, for some, to make their

debut. Most of the pieces were for sale at a fairly reasonable price, attracting buyers to invest in their projects.

The set-up of the fair was very aesthetically pleasing with white partitions and a cement floor, giving off a warehouse type of vibe. As I wondered along, awestruck at the pieces I was seeing, the thing that stood out the most was the variety of art that was being displayed. Showcased works were from across a spectrum of artistic perspective, ranging from sketches to graffiti art to aluminium print to sculptures.

One booth even had people writing down confessions that the artist was going to compile and publish. Besides independent projects, the fair featured the Matchbox Project which invited artists to create a unique matchbox artwork to be sold by silent auction where all proceeds go to charity. The award-winning short films featured at the Encounters Film Festival were being played on a screen for visitors and obviously, as it was free, I stayed glued in front of the screen for a considerable amount of time.

The best thing about these kinds of fairs is that the buyers get to properly interact with the artist who stands by, happy to explain and introduce just what it is that they make. Their

enthusiasm and passion really got to me and I was tempted to buy a sketch made on the back of an envelope. But with my student budget, I would have had to starve for a solid two weeks. To quell my urge, I merely collected all the name cards and postcards which had their art printed on the back, getting at least one from every booth.

Walking among such creative people and being awestruck at every booth I visited was a great experience, especially as a student who never really had any creative juice in her. It must be terribly difficult and risky to try and make it in the harsh world of art and yet, they are willing to try and pursue their dream. Safe to say, it was worth every penny of the eight pounds I paid for the entrance fee.

The upcoming The Other Art Fair is in April 8th to 10th next year at Victoria House. If you appreciate art and want to get a fairly affordable piece, I highly recommend going for an afternoon.

THE ARTS FORUM CLM 2.05 TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 17TH LSE Students’ Union is hosting its first ever Arts Forum! If you care about creativity, have hidden talents or value artistic expression, this is your chance to shape the Arts Community that students are developing at LSE! This is a student-led discussion hosted by Activities and Development Officer Katie, which will cover: - Representation for students involved - Collaboration opportunities - Building an arts social community - Raising awareness of creative career opportunities - Hosting an Arts Festival

EVERYONE IS WELCOME, WHETHER YOU’RE AN ACTIVE MEMBER OF AN ARTS SOCIETY OR NOT.

18 | Tuesday 17 November, 2015

FILM

14

REVIEW

TOKYO FIANCÉE Sarah Ku “TOKYO FIANCÉE” (2014), directed by Stefan Liberski, is adapted from the autobiographical novel by Amélie Nothomb.

The protagonist of the film, Amélie (portrayed by Pauline Etienne), was born in Japan, but she left the country with her Belgian parents when she was little. As a Japanophile, She returned to Japan when she was twenty years old and aspired to be a Japanese writer. She soon developed a cross-cultural romance when she worked as a French tutor for Rinri (Taichi Inoue), a Japanese Francophile.

While Amélie is a portrayal of the autographical novel’s writer Amélie Nothomb, through her short hair, free spirit, and quirkiness with almost child-like innocence, the audience can easily draw a similarity between Pauline Etienne’s Amélie and Audrey Tautou’s Amélie in the self-titled and award-winning “Amélie”.

Under Liberski’s lens, Amélie is an imaginative woman who constantly dramatises events in her head and jokes about Rinri’s father being a yakuza gang member.

The director also utilises colour very well. For instance, throughout the film Amélie dressed almost exclusively in red, and she even wore a t-shirt featuring the Japanese national flag. Thus, this creates a strong contrast between Amélie and Rinri, as the latter mostly wore black and white.

Unlike “Lost in Translation”, “Tokyo Fiancée” does not simply focus on the exotic parts of Japan. Like Coppola’s film, this film does feature stereotypical scenes like singing karaoke and having an awkward experience in a strip club, but it also incorporates many more authentic Japanese cultural elements and history, like the appreciation of nature, folktales, and history of the yakuza and geisha. The couple even visited a “ryokan”, which is a type of traditional Japanese inn with rooms having tatami flooring and a furo from a hot spring. The film also featured the historical event of the 2011 Tōhoku earthquake and tsunami. In this sense, the film fuses both the historical and contemporary features of Japan, which in my opinion shows a higher level of cultural appreciation than other Western films with a similar setting or plot.

The film further delves into the issues in the cross-cultural relationship between Amélie and Rinri. This is clearly embodied in Amélie’s line of “I’m […] scared he sees me as France and l see him as Japan”. Throughout the film, Amélie was very eager to assimilate into being Japanese through learning the language in Japanese classes, climbing the mountains,

and calling herself a samurai.

She also ended up dating a Japanese man, Rinri, and working for a Japanese company. Similarly, Amélie’s frenemy, a French woman called Yasmine, was always proactive in demonstrating her expertise in Japanese culture to compete with Amélie, and she later got engaged to a Japanese man.

On the other hand, while being tutored by Amélie, Rinri hinted that he organised a secret society, which Amélie suspected to be re-

lated to the yakuza. However, it was later revealed that the secret society, formed by Rinri and his male friends, was actually called “The French Fanatics”. Just like Amélie, Rinri attempted to shed his own identity and assimilate into the French culture by learning the language and befriending French people. Rinri’s and his friends’ embrace of Western culture was hinted at during other parts of the film. For example, while Amélie enjoyed Japanese

tea, Rinri and his friends almost exclusively drank beer, even during a traditional Japanese dinner.

One of his friends also pulled out a notepad to take notes during the dinner when Amélie explained the different types of Western beer. At the end of the film, when Amélie left the country and Rinri ended up marrying another French woman, the audience would start to doubt whether they truly liked each other, or whether they were simply obsessed with

each other’s cultural identities.

“Tokyo Fiancée” is a beautifully shot and humorous film that demonstrates a relatively rich understanding of Japanese culture in the Western contemporary cinema, though the ending could be said to be both abrupt and anticlimactic. While the film features the romantic relationship between Amélie and Rinri, perhaps the director also hints at the fine line between cultural appreciation and cultural appropriation.

FILM Tom Sayner 2014 WAS A PARTICULARLY strong year for cinema. Yet perhaps the best film of the year was a relatively small budget work that resulted in box office failure. ‘Under the Skin’, directed by Jonathan Glazer, is visually breath-taking and deeply provocative, on both an emotional and intellectual level.

Scarlett Johansson, in undoubtedly her finest performance, plays an alien hunting humans in the Scottish highlands and the bleak urban landscape of Glasgow. We watch as Johansson seduces her eager male prey and leads them to her house where they encounter a Kubrickian nightmare of black sludge and shifting surfaces. The audience receives very little information - her motives remain unknown as does her origin. Yet this merely adds to the constant sense of unease that pervades the film as we are assaulted by a variety of stark angles and images.

Glazer, pushing the boundaries of cinéma vérité, uses custom built hidden cameras to capture unscripted dialogue between Johansson and real Glaswegians, unaware of the presence of one of Hollywood’s biggest stars. As grim and grey housing blocks flash by the irony becomes clear-that Johansson very well be an alien given the gulf between her world and that of the poverty stricken Scottish estates. The CDC camera gives these images an immersive quality with dark, rich visuals intercut with startlingly white snow in the mountains or the brooding greys of the sea. To supplement this Mica Levi provides a hauntingly beautiful score, performed on the viola, that is at times sparse and at others intense and urgent.

For all the brilliance of the film’s cinematography it’s in its exploration of sexuality and human nature that it truly elevates itself. We watch the daily lives of ordinary men and women through the eyes of this alien and gain a new perspective on the small acts of kindness and cruelty, passion and shame and myriad traits that make us. And it’s possible to detect human traits developing in Johansson’s own character; a curiosity about her body, a caution towards strangers and even basic empathy.

There are also clear feminist undertones in this reversal of contemporary rape culture where it is the men who should avoid the darkness and sexual encounters.

Indeed the very casting of Scarlett Johansson raises questions of gender identity. Despite her seductive clothing and frequent nude scenes this is not the shallow sexualisation that Johansson normally encounters in her Hollywood roles. For although it contains some sensual imagery the portrayal of sex as a weapon means the overall effect is far from erotic.

REVIEW

UNDER THE SKIN (2014)

19

2014|

Tuesday 17 November, 2015

MUSIC

MUSIC

LABEL OF THE WEEK:

MUSIC

DELSIN RECORDS Will Locke

Hundulu – Chymera (from Hundulu [2007]) Chymera is an Irish veteran of electronic music. It’s this unique, melodic, and beautiful house/techno sound that has cultivated a fanbase almost as large as the average Irishman’s extended family.

Peace of Mind (Electrosoul) – Claro Intelecto (from Peace of Mind [2014]) This ‘Electrosoul’ version only saw release last year, and has an accomplished and sophisticated feel.

Bulp Head – Redshape (from Red Pack II [2013]) On ‘Bulp Head’, the red-masked Berliner he combines jacking electro beats and crunchy analogue bass with non-quantised broken chords and some random Japanese girl talking over the middle section (so kawaii).

Kirana’s Lament – Newworldaquarium (from The Dead Bears [2008]) Joachim Peteri is an experimental electronic music producer and DJ in the deceptive guise of a lighthearted Dutchman with a penchant for beer, and ‘Kirana’s Lament’ echoes those laidback sentiments with its rolling groove and shimmering sampled guitars.

The Ample Waters – Erdbeerschnitzel (from The Ample Waters [2014]) The excellently-named Erdbeerschnitzel resides in the excellently-named village of Mittelfischbach, and although he is a shy country boy from rural Bavaria, he makes tracks of such potency that they produce hands-in-the-air moments at the Panorama Bar, the best venue in the world for house (sorry Fabric).

Rond – Steve Rachmad (from Rond / Bot [2008]) ‘Rond’ is a slinky and distorted eight-minute house workout complete with solemn synthetic strings and hissing hi-hats.

Rare Education – Conforce (from Machine Conspiracy [2014]) Conforce, is probably my favourite artist on the Delsin roster. ‘Rare Education’ boasts constantly mutating arpeggios floating above a bed of deep kick drums and a sinister bass line.

Upekah – son.sine (from Upekah [2013]) ‘Upekah’ is some of the most beautiful dub techno you’ll ever hear, directed by gently plucked bass hums and adorned with reverberating piano notes.

Spores – Vince Watson (from Ethereal [2008]) ‘Spores’ feels like being trapped inside a psychopathic organ whilst having a mild panic attack. Check it out.

Lab Work – D5 (from Future Sense [2007]) This track’s lilting bass line and mellow stabs finds the perfect mix of drive and groove.

WE’RE LOOKING FOR DEPUTIES! TECHNOLOGY AND THEATRE ENTHUSIASTS IF YOU’RE INTERESTED IN WRITING UNDER THESE TWO CATEGORIES FOR PARTB PLEASE E-MAIL US AT PARTB@THEBEAVERONLINE.CO.UK

p a r t 21

FOOD&LIFESTYLE

B

WHEN HEALTHY MET TASTY...

GIVING TASTE TO TOFU Caroline Shurman-Grenier

TOFU IS LIKE THAT AWFUL SWEATER YOUR AUNT BOUGHT YOU FOR CHRISTMAS: YOU LEARN TO LOVE IT. My parents absolutely detest tofu, and I wasn’t always a big fan of it to be honest. I mean, it’s gooey, has a strange texture and has virtually no taste whatsoever. Why on earth would I eat it? The answer is quite simple, young grasshopper: one needs to know how to prepare it to give it flavor. Easier said than done, Master. It’s taken me a while to find recipes that I actually crave, but the challenge was accepted, and the challenge has finished successfully - I came up with 2 recipes to give taste to tofu.

First thing first, you need to know what tofu to buy. I wish I could help you on this, but I can’t. All I can say is that I prefer firm tofu, because it doesn’t fall into a thousand pieces when you prepare it.The way I make it, the only way I’ve ever made it, is by pan frying it with some coconut oil.

Cut up your tofu into cubes, put 1 tbsp of coconut oil in the pan, and when it melts, add the tofu.

Leave it on one side on high for at least 6 minutes, then flip it. Keep doing that until the tofu has the consistency you want. Also add some salt and pepper as you go along. There is more taste to come...

While you’re making the tofu, make some brown rice. It will be helpful later, I promise. I aksi highly recommend stir frying some veggies. I used kale, broccoli and brussel sprouts but you’re welcome to use anything you want. To do this, take another pan, add some coconut oil, add the chopped brussel sprouts. Cook for 7 minutes, then add 1/4 cup

water, keep cooking them for 5 minutes, then add the other veggies. When the consistency is to your liking, leave on the side.

Now to the fun part, I have two recipes for sauces I think you should try. These measurements are for one portion, because ya know, I’m single and I cook for myself.

Soya Maple Sauce - inspired by my wonderful mother, I hope she doesn’t kill me for putting this on tofu.

1/4 cup soya sauce 1 tbsp maple syrup Add in a pan once the tofu is out of the pan, stirring together until they seem combined.

Add to your veggies and tofu and rice, and enjoy!

Peanut Sauce - A few years ago, I took a cooking class and we made chicken satay. This sauce is inspired from that class - it’s the best thing.

1 tbsp hoisin sauce 1 tbsp sugar 2 or 3 tbsp water 1 tbsp natural peanut butter 1/2 lime In a small pot, add the water, sugar, Hoisin sauce and let it boil. Next add the peanut butter and lime juice. Pour over veggies and rice and tofu and enjoy!

There you have it. Tofu has taste. I didn’t think it was possible for a while, but now I’m convinced. As Adidas says, “Impossible is Nothing”.

THEATRE IVANOV AT THE

CHICHESTER FESTIVAL THEATRE Noah D’Aeth

IN 1887 FIODOR KORSCH ASKED Anton Chekov to write him a play. A theatre owner, Korsch expected a simple comedy. Instead, Chekov produced a four act drama. The result of ten days of frenzied writing, Ivanov, is a work which touches on themes of love, despair and honesty. As one of Chekov’s early plays, it also features a sense of melodrama and unbridled passion which would disappear from his later work. David Hare’s colloquial translation and a fine ensemble of British actors ensure that this spirit is faithfully adhered to.

What results is a play which is at times hilarious and at others tragic.

The story follows the desperate travails of Nikolai Ivanov, a progressive country squire who is up to his eyes in debt and who senses his life slipping away from him.

He is surrounded on all sides by problems.

His wife, Anna, is gravely ill, his Uncle, Count Matvyei, has been made bored and restless by country life and his estate man-

ager, Mikhail Borkin, is constantly scheming and always on the look out for a money making scam.

To add to his woes, Ivanov is also confronted by the moralising Doctor Lvov, a self-described ‘honest man’. The play comes to gravitate around the animosity between these two. Ivanov sees a ray of light, however, in Sasha, the daughter of his chief creditor. She falls desperately in love with him. As their romance proceeds though, it ultimately appears haphazard and ends in tragedy.

The sense of hardship is not overbearing however. Jonathan Kent, the director, succeeds in bringing out the humour of Chekov’s work. It satirises the gentry via the card table and the wine cellar. This is not just a bleak sojourn to the Russian steppe, but also a vodka stained romp through the drawing room. The set, designed by Tom Pye, evokes this dual persona even further. To the side of the stage a copse of birch trees sit amongst a bed

of reeds and stagnant water, whilst behind it gnarled stumps of oak recede into the distance. It captures both the beautiful and the desolate, which sit side by side in Russia.

It is the mark of Chekov’s plays that each character is given the room to breathe and feel authentic. In that vein, Samuel West delivers a fine performance as the neurotic Ivanov. A tense and hunched display, it encapsulates the moral dilemmas of the man. Whilst James McArdle’s Scottish lilt adds a Presbyterian rod to the upright honesty of Doctor Lvov. The contrast between these two is central to the play, and works wonderfully with West and McArdle.

Part of Young Chekov, this production was the second play in a trilogy of works

by Chekov which have just enjoyed a successful run at the Chichester festival theatre. The very popular critical and public reception of these productions means they are likely to be performed in London soon.

I would welcome the chance for a second viewing.

NUS EXTRA: THE ESSENTIAL STUDENT DISCOUNT CARD Available to buy from the LSESU Shop and online: www.nus.org.uk/en/nus-extra

AND MUCH MORE

Local Population of Cromer not impressed by charity stunt:

RAG, Get Lost!

Rare Sighting of the Lesser Spotted Milibae on LSE Campus

By Anna Mae Ling Freshly enlightened after what was most likely an incredible LSE public event concerning the Greek financial crisis, one certain former and glorious Labour leader by the name of Ed Miliband casually strolled past the Saw Swee Hock at approximately 9.40pm with his posse. I know, because I was there.

I remember it like it was last Tuesday (as it incidentally was).

I had just left The Venue after attending the inspirational ‘Tackling Sexism and Homophobia in Rugby’ event held by LSE Men’s Rugby, LSE Athletics Union and the LSE Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Taskforce. Indeed, I’d just had the pleasure of being surrounded by some of the greatest international and grassroots rugby legends of the world! Nigel Owens – Stonewall Gay Personality of the Year, Claire Purdy – England Women’s Rugby Player and current world champion and Heather Taylor, pioneer of #ThisGirlCan to name a few. But (and I really mean this is the kindest way) all of this paled in comparison to the moment Edward Samuel Miliband walked straight past Tuns.

Having just secured a photo with Nigel Owens and invited Claire Purdy to Women’s Rugby training, I was blissfully unaware of the gift that God was about to bestow upon me. Of this, I am ashamed.

Being a huge fan of Ed and the Labour that he stood for, I should have sensed that I was breathing the same air as my hero. I will always hang my head low at the thought that I was not the one that noticed him first. That honour belonged to some of the truest social activists I know – Alice Rowland and Jessica Davies.

Of course their anti-Tory sentiment and willingness to spend hours and hours creating

care packages to hand out to the homeless instilled within them some greater worthiness to meet Ed (On that note, winter is coming and they are continuing to take donations for their care packages, this writer encourages you to get involved and contact them).

Thankfully (and for this I am eternally grateful), a delightful member of the SU Staff walked over to my general vicinity (he must have sensed my devotion to the left wing cause) and said in hushed tones: ‘That’s Ed Miliband’.

The world stopped. I know I exaggerate a lot as part of an exercise of my creative prerogative, but I would happily put my hand on my heart and swear an unbreakable vow that the world did, in fact and in truth, stop. I just ran. I felt like Usain Bolt, running for my country, my dignity, my life. For the brief three seconds it took me to catch up to him, I could see my entire nonexistent political career flash before my eyes. I caught up to him, and panting as much as a mother in labour I half-screamed ‘HI YOU’RE ED HI’.

A very shell-shocked Ed regained his composure almost instantly (what a star) and shook my hand. Upon being face to face with my hero, a million thoughts rushed through my head. What should I do? Should I tell him that I cried like a baby when we lost? Should I make a pig-related joke about David Cameron? Should I give him the sandwich in my bag and tell him to eat it and prove the world wrong? I shook his hand quite vigorously, and asked if he wanted to see the Labour stickers on my laptop. He politely declined, but asked us (a group had congregated around him by this point) what we studied. When he asked us what we wanted to do after university, Alice enthusiastically replied ‘IWANNAWORKFORTHEGOVERNMENTIDIDANINTERN-

S H I P W I T H T H E G OV E R N MENTLEGALSERVICE’ to which Ed seemed genuinely interested. We spoke at length (5 minutes) and I told him that Women’s Rugby is a radical left wing organisation dedicated to the collapse of capitalism (disclaimer: it is not).

I’m not quite sure what else I said, because I was so in awe, but I do remember telling him he was my inspiration. This awkwardly charming man had led a Labour party that I truly believed was going to win and had championed many values that I hold close to my heart.

We semi-coerced Ed into having a photo with us, and if you get the chance to see it, he looks a bit scared. Photos were taken, love was professed and too soon Ed was gone. Perhaps I will spend the rest of my life Gatsby-esque, reminiscing about one of the greatest things that has ever happened to me. A moment which ended with Nona Buckley-Irvine running towards the Tuns screaming ‘NOOOOOOOOOOOO I MISSED HIMMMMMMM’. But I’ll move on. Jeremy Corbyn is pretty incredible and he’s already well on his way to revolutionising the Labour movement. What I’m sure of is this – Ed may no longer be a prominent part of the Labour movement, but as one of the many he inspired, I’ll keep fighting the good fight too.

24 |Tuesday November 17, 2015

Greek Crisis In Short The answers to the questions asked by non-Greeks Aristeidis Grivokostopoulos LSE Undergraduate “WHAT’S HAPPENING IN Greece? You know. With the crisis and such.” This is a typical question I am left to answer these days, as I arrive in a new country. Europeans on the other hand, do not start a conversation with a question. They start with a categorical statement that covers both the diagnosis and the cure of this “illness”. “Greece should leave the Euro and start printing money. Their own money.” Fortunately for myself, I can defend the opinion of the majority of Greeks, which is that the former “cure” is not acceptable under any circumstance.

So when did it all start? Postelection period 2009. The new government orders the agency responsible for economic data reporting, ELSTAT, to issue its figure for government deficit. As it initially did not follow EU regulation on how government deficit is calculated, the revised deficit was larger.

This created a crisis of trust which has continued ever since. Soon after, hedge funds and other investors attacked the new government through the debt market, reacting to its expansionary fiscal policy. As

The City

Section Editor: Alex Gray Deputy Editors: Henry Mitchell

always with speculatory attacks, there is a self-fulfilling expectation, thus, due to extremely high spreads between the Greek and German bonds, borrowing became unsustainable. And what happens in such cases? The IMF is brought in. And so it was, together with whatever side-effect this may mean. And the word “side-effect” is a major understatement when talking about the “structural adjustment programmes” of the Fund. Contractionary fiscal policy, labour market reforms, product market reforms.

These three pillars make up the conditions set on borrowing at such rates. These three conditions also prolonged the Greek recession for more than 5 years, reaching a 25% GDP reduction before stabilising.

Instead of stating the obvious, namely that the recession was caused by the recessionary measures undertaken by 3 (soon 4) governments, it is crucial to understand why and how did Greece end up in this viscious cycle of unsustainable loans, either given out by the markets or the institutions. How did its debt reach levels so high in the first place? Ironically, two of the country’s recent finance ministers have given the explanation. Mr Alogoskoufis (2004-2009) attributes this

debt accumulation to endogenous factors, such as the deficit expansion bias of Greek governments of both parties. More specifically, both governing parties (PASOK and ND) undertook expansionary policies in the election year. At the same time though, his research shows that the bulk of public debt accumulation in percentage terms happened in the 1980s when a socialist Keynesian PASOK was in power.

Although Alogoskoufis attributes the latter phenomenon to ideological tendencies, Mr Tsakalotos (current minister) dives deeper into the analysis of how sovereign, not private, debt was increased during this period and throughout Greece’s post-1974 history. In his opinion, exogenous factors such as the establishment of neoliberalism after the oil crisis, were the drivers behind debt accumulation of any sort in the West. As Greece joined the EEC, though still in a development stage, the Greeks reacted differently to this world phenomenon.

Consumers needed to consume and employees needed to work, yet private debt was expensive (high interest rates), so the private sector (both households and firms) could not borrow and asked for the gov-

ernment to do so. This is how clientelism was reborn (Greece suffered from this “illness” in the pre-1967 period as well). In other words, the citizens-voters had demands that could have only be met through welfare provision, public investment and the expansion of the public sector labour force - all through the media of clientelism and, most fundamentally, the issuance of debt (mainly provided by Greece’s EEC partners and their banks).

Returning to my point, if we look ever more closely at this 19811989 period of public debt explosion, we find the reply to the “why not leave the Euro?” question. During that period, the government did exactly what the anti-Euro supporters dictate as a “magic potion” - the currency was devalued. A devalued currency brought about inflation and its second-round effects (e.g. detraction of private investment ), while at the same time the government was caught in a cycle of investment to boost output. Living standards diverged from the rest of Europe and export competitiveness was not improved (inflation resulted in labour cost increases). The “cure” is a paradox. It proposes that we should return to the ways that made us “ill” in the first place.

City Careers are a Real Issue

We should be more imaginative about the way universities work, and who they work for Luther Blisset #OccupyLSE Member

LAST WEEK CHRISTOPHER Wilburn wrote an article defending those LSE students that aim to get corporate and financial jobs. The article was in response to a recent protest by Occupy LSE at an LSE careers fair, where protesters hung banners and handed out leaflets that challenged the growing financialisation of the university and the role it plays as a training ground for the institutions of power. This is a brief response from a group of those protestors.

Mr Wilburn is clear in his position that there is nothing ‘inherently wrong about the bigger city professions’, as bankers and financiers are wealth creators who contribute more to society through paying higher taxes. This argument for trickle down economics is now widely rejected. The financial crisis destroyed the illusion that bankers are ingenious wealth creators, who if left to their own devices and given free rein over the economy, will bring about a stable and prosperous world. Looking back over the last 40 years of financial liberalisation it seems that the banking system has much less to do with innovation and wealth creation and acts more like a global ponzi scheme, that centralises wealth and power

and has brought about a legacy of austerity that attacks the most marginalised people’s quality and conditions of life. When the schools, hospitals, universities, child care centres, libraries are either being destroyed or privatised, Mr Wilburn’s defence of the systems that brought about the current crisis seems ignorant at best, and callous at worse. TO those who defend

“It is a political choice, and perhaps the most important political choice that we will make after leaving university. ” such systems of power – you and your careers fair are legitimate targets for sabotage.

The problem however runs deeper than jobs in the City.

Choosing what we do with our lives and what type of work we enter isn’t simply a difference of opinion.

It is a political choice, and perhaps the most important political choice that we will make after leaving university.

Our generation has lost its collective sense to imagine a life that does not fit into the corrupt struc-

tures of the current world. We accept the narrow occupational choices we are given, where our choice seems to be between accepting a low level admin position in large bureaucracy in either a corporate, NGO or governmental institution. Hundreds of creative, intelligent and aspirational people are applying for these same positions and the question that springs to mind is why do we accept this?

For some people, the quest for power and privilege may trump all other factors of work, but for most of us this acceptance of the current ‘job market’ comes from a failure to see any alternative that will provide an interesting and secure life. And what I mean by this is a collective alternative, for our whole generation, to break the boring and monotonous cycle of post-graduate life.

This again comes back to the

Photo Credit: the Daily Touch

ongoing political battle to determine the purpose and structure of the university system as a whole.

Should universities be a training centre for the institutions of power, where students invest or indebt themselves to the ultimate aim of becoming more employable? This concept of the university takes as given the structures of society, and therefore the injustices of society, and mainly exists to facilitate the careers of its rich and privileged students. Or should universities be free and liberated spaces, where political, creative and critical thought can flourish and real alternatives can be built? A real benefit of a new university system might be to raise the imagination of our generation so that those trying to enter a summer internship at say Goldman Sachs, would be laughed out of university for being unimaginative, power-hungry and bland.

The Boycott Paradox

The City |25

BDS’ campaign’s real victims will be the Palestinians it professes to protect Louis Klineberg LSE Undergraduate THIS WEEK HAS BEEN tumultuous for Palestinian/ Israeli affairs. SOAS held a ‘vigil for Palestinian martyrs’, and Boris Johnson dismissed the supporters of the movement calling for boycott, divestment and sanctions of Israel (BDS) as “a bunch of corduroy-jacketed... lefty academics who have no real standing in the matter and I think are highly unlikely to be influential

in Britain.” On top of this, the EU passed legislation stating that goods produced/sourced from ‘occupied territory’ in the West Bank, that are then sold within the EU, must be explicitly labelled so their origins are clear to consumers. This move was damned by the Israelis as “discriminatory” and praised by many within the BDS and pro-Palestinian movement, I will discuss whether in fact this deal is beneficial, or whether it will be a costly move. However, one would certainly question why the EU feels the need to label goods specifically

Photo Credit: Flickr, WrenB

Cooperation like this project between Palestinian and Israeli football coaches will be necessary for a continuing peace process.

from this region, noting there are currently 200 different disputed territories worldwide.

The EU ambassador to Israel commented “It’s an indication of origin, not a warning label,” however as tensions continue to rise and the BDS movement continues to fuel the drive to boycott Israel, there is no doubt these products will be targeted. BDS supporters have form on this; they have previously attacked supermarkets for selling Israeli goods, going as far as wiping the goods off the shelves, preventing customers from purchasing. The decision will unquestionably cause a decline in the demand for goods from the region. It has been estimated that approximately $50 million will be lost each year following this decision, representing a fifth of all economic output from the affected regions. As cost of living and economic performance were key indicators in the last Israeli election, it follows that such declines in sales will most certainly hurt Israel, with its opponents hoping that it will act as a catalyst to force the Israelis into altering their settlement policy. From BDS’

point of view, this settlement is illegal, so this they would see as a victory.

However, one must look at who exactly the policy will hurt, before concluding whether or not the policy is positive. If we assume that the key target for this legislation is Israel, it would follow that the EU would want as little collateral damage to the Palestinians as possible. The statistics show a different story however; over 25,000 Palestinians legally work for Israelis in the territories stated. On average, these workers enjoy wages

“One must look at who the policy will hurt, before concluding whether or not the policy is positive” 3 times those paid by equivalent Palestinian companies and Mr Netanyahu (Israeli PM) argued that “the Palestinians would be the first to suffer from these new

measures.” This was corroborated by the leader of a Palestinian trade union, who admitted that the deal will be detrimental to workers in the short term, but such a sacrifice would be worthwhile for the long term gains.

Israel’s economic minister stated that the move will cost the Israeli economy $50 million a year.

Compared to the $30 billion of trade between the EU and Israel each year, it appears that the economic impact for Israel as a whole will not be overly damaging.

However, by aiming this legislation at the occupied territories, the EU has failed to see that it will in fact be hurting the very people it is trying to help - the Palestinians. Many Palestinian workers live and/or work in the territories in question, and it will be those individuals and families who are most adversely affected.

In the long run, this option may prove to be a helping hand for peace, but there is no doubt that the short term economic hopes and prosperity of the Palestinians have been damaged.

We Can’t Bank on Trust Recovering

We must focus more on how we can recover the banking system’s most impotant asset Henry Mitchell LSE Undergraduate

WIDESPREAD MISCONDUCT. Market manipulation. Unfettered greed. For many people this was the image of the banking sector and the wider financial markets post 2008 and arguably, despite 7 years passing, the public still has little faith in the financial industry.

However since the economic crisis, 20 of the world’s largest banks have paid more than $235 billion in fines and compensation. Surely such reparations make amends for previous misconduct and act as sufficient deterrent to future wrongdoers?

“20 of the world’s largest banks have paid more than $235 billion in fines and compensation” However it seems social opinion is much more of skepticism and hostility than of absolution and compassion. This was reflected by the most recent comments from Bank of England governor, Mark Carney, who stated that markets have been “tainted by widespread

misconduct”. As a result this week saw the Bank’s first ‘Open Forum’ on the future of financial markets where members of the public were invited to attend in an attempt to rebuild the sector’s ‘social license’.

The fact that this act of transparency occurred exemplifies the extreme lack of trust in the sector.

The event was attended by George Osborne who himself expressed understanding at the anger felt by the public towards markets.

PwC research shows that fewer than one in three customers trust their bank, and over half of customers believe that the regulatory reforms put in place are not enough to ensure that history won’t repeat itself. Given the clear breakdown in this relationship and the apathy of the public towards the sector, what does this mean for the future?

Should we be forever skeptical of financial institutions, or is it time to move on?

Giles Fraser writing in the Guardian recently argued that the abundance of greed within human nature and the high incentives for banks and bankers to outfox regulators mean that misconduct is inevitable unless suspicion on behalf of the public is becomes the default approach. Personally I believe this is rather negative, greed is not inherent in all and it is important to remember the heinous actions of a few have created a terrible stigma

for the whole industry. Clearly it is not in the interests of the economy for there to be fundamental mistrust between consumers and banks; this could lead to cash hoarding amongst customers, and a drop in savings, creating a systemic inability to fund investment. Equally it is completely unpalatable for large corporations, specifically banks, to potentially exploit their customers and the regulators. So perhaps a little skepticism is necessary to build the integrity and honesty of the banking relationship as opposed to

Photo Credit: Flickr, Jonny White

whole-hearted apathy, which would lead to a breakdown in the banking system as a whole.

Ultimately rebuilding trust in the financial industry is a slow process; the sector is seen by many as largely responsible for one of the worst economic downturns in modern history. It is easy to understand why members of the public who have seen real-term income reduction, prolonged unemployment and witnessed the increased use of food banks have a complete disdain for the banking sector. No matter

how sincere the public statement from the chief executive of RBS or Barclays is, it will do little to satisfy those worst affected by the financial collapse. Fundamentally trust is built on actions not words, and whilst new regulations and lessons learned from the past should act as a deterrent, it will be the way in which the banks themselves decide to conduct their business, how they incentivize their employees and the transparency through which they operate that will start to repair the damage.

26 | Tuesday November 17, 2015

The eurozone needs a new approach in order to restore growth.

Alexander Hurst Features Editor

MARTIN WOLF IS THE CHIEF Economics Commenter for the Financial Times, where he has written in varying capacities since 1987, and where he wields far-reaching influence through his columns. He has been called “the most widely trusted pundit in the current financial crisis,” In 2014, he published The Shifts And The Shocks: What We’ve Learned And Still Have To Learn From The Financial Crisis.

On Monday, November 9, he came to LSE to lecture on the “The Long Goodbye: How the crisis casts a long shadow,” and talked about the divergence in economic recovery in the US and the Eurozone, and the potential for an emerging markets slowdown. I sat down to chat with him briefly prior to his lecture.

Ok, so I thought I would start off with somewhat of an unconventional question— you’ve written about climate change, Mark Carney, the governor of the Bank of England, spoke last month about climate change from a central banker’s perspective. At COP21 [the global climate change negotiations beginning in a few weeks in Paris] one of the potential sticking points is a 100-billion-dollar climate fund that the Least Developed Countries want, to fund adaptation and energy transition in their countries. Would there be any way for Central Banks, as part of ongoing quantitative easing

programs, to potentially purchase bonds from such a fund in order to finance it?

Eurozone? By being promising to be “credibly irresponsible” as Krugman termed it?

Ah, well that’s a very interesting question. I think the answer would be…I’m trying to think about whether it would be legal, and probably yes. It would certainly be very peculiar. Central banks are permitted to purchase assets in pursuit of monetary policy goals, that;s their mandate. That includes the functioning of the credit system and all the rest of it. Furthermore, in principle, they are not supposed to take credit risk—at least significant credit risk. So even if they buy riskier assets, they have to be adequately collateralized. And they are not supposed to take losses—fiscal authority is supposed to take losses.

Now those two considerations I think would rule out the purchase of such bonds; they are for development purposes, climate change purposes, and while these are very good things they are not the mandate of a central bank. Furthermore, by definition, clean energy bonds floated by very poor countries would be way below investment grade. Not even in the B category. So I don’t think they could be the solution to this problem.

I’m not sure “credibly irresponsible” would work—I’ve never been completely convinced that raising inflation expectations would be completely possible without him having a mechanism, but let’s think about the two elements of this. A central banker can only be credibly irresponsible if he’s allowed to get away with it. And so the first thing he’s got to ask himself is, “will I get a consensus from the board?” And he will only get a consensus if it’s clear that things are really desperate, and there’s no real alternative.

I think his view would be that things are not that desperate and there are still alternatives, and therefore there’s no chance that [he] will get support from the board. And then the second problem, which I think is way more fundamental, is it’s not obvious what he would do if he were going to be more desperate. He could obviously do a lot more QE—he could buy everything. If he were to buy all the assets in Europe, he could generate a lot more inflation, but he would be stopped politically long before he did that.

Even the Bank of Japan’s policies, which are much more aggressive than his, don’t seem to be having a decisive effect. It really has to be very very aggressive, because the problem is the bonds he’s buying are mere money right now, because the yields are so low. He can obviously buy vast quantities, and then there are basically two supremely unconventional buys. He could buy immense quantities of risky assets

You point to [Mario] Draghi’s comments about doing “whatever it takes” to save the euro as an example of him calling the market’s bluff, and thereby not actually needing to take action as his words alone brought down interest rates on sovereign debt—could he apply the same principle to combatting deflation in the

and push them through the stratosphere, and if he did so that would clearly have an economic effect. But if he started buying all the properties, the commercial real estate,the warehouses, and all the rest of it, and equities in huge quantities, he could push them to whatever price he wanted. But governments would stop him long before he got there.

The other alternative that I think is much more sensible is helicopter money—to send money to people. And i think the European view would be very very clear that’s fiscal policy, and the central bank is not set up to do it. So his problem, at least to me, is that it’s not very clear what he could do now, that he could get away with, which would make a decisive difference. The obvious thing to do is just more QE, and maybe it would work if it were big enough. It might have to be just unbelievably big.

Going more into political pressures on central banks, there seems to be an interesting divide between the US, with a more far more conservative right wing yet looser monetary and fiscal policy, and Europe, which has despite its center-right being more moderate than the American Republicans, had no QE for six years, and fiscal austerity. Why the difference?

I think there are probably two main reasons. First, the US has a central bank that is fairly well established, has a fairly unrestricted mandate.

Continued opposite

Photo Credit: Daniela Hartmann, 2008, Flickr. Used under the Creative Commons media license

Features

Section Editors: Taryana Odayar Alexander Hurst Deputy Editors: Stefanos Argyros Daniel Shears Sebastian Shehadi

The FT’s Martin Wolf On The Financial Crisis

Lukashenko’s Illegitimate Autocracy

Features | 27

Belarus should follow in the example of its eastern European neighbours and democratize Daniel Shears Deputy Features Editor ON THE 11TH OCTOBER 2015, Belarus witnessed an event which existed not in isolation, but as part of a larger chain of events connected by a historical thread of corruption and intimidation.

The event in question was the Belarusian Presidential election. The outcome? A decisively overwhelming victory for Mr Alexander Lukashenko, who won 83.5% of the vote (with an apparent 87% turnout, although this has been viewed with reasonable scepticism by opposition activists). His opponent received an astonishingly low 5%, given the amount of opposition to the current leader of 21 years.

If this sounds suspicious to you, good, because it is. A look at Belarus’s authoritarian history will remove any lingering suspicion and replace it with justified anger. 5 years prior to this election, in 2010, Lukashenko similarly won a landslide victory of 80%, with the opposition leader winning a meagre 3%; in the protests that followed citizens and presidential opposition candidates were beaten and arrested by the state militia. This is state repression not incomparable to that of autocratic regimes in the Middle East during the Arab Spring of 2011.

Again, in the 2006 Presidential election, Lukashenko won 80% of the vote, with his main rival candidate Alaksander Kazulin, beaten and arrested during protests. In fact, Lukashenko has not lost a Presidential election since the adoption of the Belarusian constiContinued from opposite The American people to just go ahead and do things. And it didn’t take too long to build a consensus for that, it’s quite an integrated, coherent institution. And whatever the ideology of the Republicans was, the people in charge during George W’s last two years, and when Obama got there, were pretty pragmatic centrists.

So they could do it. The Republicans—at least these Republicans—were pretty much just a minority. And Hank Paulson’s a long, long way from these people. So that’s the American side.

I think the problem in Europe is two-fold. First, the ideology on monetary and fiscal policy of the European system is very remarkably conservative. Very stability oriented.

And is that a function of German domestic politics?

It’s German views, going

tution (and a consolidation of its independence) in 1994.

What we are seeing here is systematic and systemic corruption by an autocratic leader unwilling to give up his seat of power. Checks and balances were in place to prevent this type of situation occurring; the constitution limited the same figure from being President to two terms, but in 2004 Lukashenko unilaterally repealed this clause.

Parallels can clearly be drawn with the 22nd amendment to the American constitution, a safeguard put in place to ensure relatively frequent transitions of power and prevent (in theory) tyrannical rule.

Elections are the primary institution of representative democracy; therefore if there is no legitimate voter choice, can we really call Belarus a democracy at all? The consensus is no (with the exception of Russia). Belarus has been rated as the worst country for press freedom in Europe by the Press Freedom Index 2013-14, Freedom House has labelled it “not free” and the Index of Economic Freedom described the country as “repressed”.

A democracy can have all the democratic institutions and mechanisms it likes, but without pluralism and voter choice, these become utterly redundant. It is the observable outcome that matters more than the systems put in place.

What we are witnessing in Belarus can be safely described as electoral authoritarianism, where the state allows elections symbolically, but ensures the elite always win. As we have seen, Belarus has limited press freedom, a key societal institution

designed to inform the public of their choices at election time. Without an independent and objective press, state influence and pervasiveness can be extremely effective.

Even if Lukashenko was elected legitimately for every election since the mid-1990s, this still doesn’t qualify Belarus as a democracy.

A political-scientific measure of democracy known as the “D/D” measure states that any regime that has not displayed a change of power from one party to another under identical electoral conditions is a dictatorship. If Lukashenko never loses, how can his citizens, and the European community at large, ever believe he is willing to relinquish his power?

The evidence suggests he will engage almost any means by which to sustain his power, whether this be repression of opposition, electoral fraud or simply usurping the rule of law; paragraph 112 of the Belarusian electoral code explicitly states that “questions connected with election and dismissal of the President of the Republic of Belarus” are prohibited from being brought to a referendum (as Lukashenko did in 2004).

This 21st century European state appears reminiscent of 20th century dictatorial single-party regimes like the Soviet Union or China, which saw the cost of repression as a small price to pay compared to the costs of democratisation. What seems most shocking is the lack of press coverage given to the situation in Belarus (until recently), which sticks out as an anomaly given the relatively democratic and liberal European com-

munity it exists within.

Of Belarus’s neighbours, Lithuania has maintained strong democratic traditions and employs proportional representation to elect half of its unicameral Parliament, and Poland is a peaceful constitutional democracy with a respect for the rule of law. Unlike Middle Eastern and African nations, which often exist within geo-political spheres of corruption and centralised power, Belarus seems oblivious to the political practises of its democratic European counterparts.

The question that remains then is will Belarus ever democratise?

And if it does, how will this change be initiated? There is widespread public dissatisfaction with the corrupt and fraudulent election practises, but so far there has been no large scale civil disobedience or attempt at revolution as seen in the Middle East 4 years ago. The EU, since the late 1990s, has attempted

back to the rejection of Keynesianism, which I think is partly a rejection of the policies associated with Hitler. So it’s a deep rooted thing. And many other Europeans have bought into the same ideology. But the second aspect is unique to Europe--this is an international problem.

In America nobody asks really when this is being done, look nobody got up to my knowledge in Ohio, California, and said “why are we bailing out New York?”

They could have presented it as a bailout of New York, as “these stupid corrupt Wall Street bankers who got us into this mess, why should we bail out New York.” “Drop Dead,” someone famously said in the 70’s when Gerald Ford—but nobody saw it that way in America, right?

But in Europe, it’s an international crisis. The Germans said, “you guys screwed up, if you had behaved like us, never would have happened”—not true, but anyway, and the other side, umm, didn’t have the money. So the creditors said,

“well you’re fundamentally irresponsible, now you’re asking us to pay, but we have no fundamental responsibility to you, it’s not in the treaty, it’s ruled out.

You can’t borrow, you’ve just got to stop borrowing.” So the fact that this couldn’t be solved collectively, because there was no collective mechanism other than monetary policy, made the American solution impossible.

To give you one example, the Americans eventually federalized the banking sector, and the Euro didn’t have a federal banking system, every country had to save its own banking system, and some countries couldn’t, and then we get a huge series of crises. So fundamentally, the problem is not about the politics, it’s about the institutions.

fective at reducing inequality?

Some have argued that QE has fueled a rise in inequality. Is there any merit to that argument? And of the four paths you talk about as solutions—you mention the Chicago Plan—is there one that would be more ef-

to democratise the Belarusian regime through largely symbolic actions such as political rhetoric and partial exclusion from the ENP, however Europe has refrained from any significant de facto sanctions.

The Index of Censorship suggested back in 2012 that this was because “an economic embargo could provoke humanitarian disaster”, and “because of Belarus’s geopolitical importance.”

The organisation argues that instead of accepting the authoritarian nature of Belarus, as the EU did in 2008 (claiming “restoration of democracy” was no longer feasible), it should engage with the democratic elements in Belarusian civil society in order to effectively co-ordinate a unified democratic resistance. However, as long as ties with Russia remain in place, change will not be easy, and only time will tell what future holds for the Belarusian people.

Photo Credit: Flickr mb7art

I think inequality is relevant in terms of aggregate demand, and that’s a big problem. I don’t think—I think it’s very implausible that loose monetary policy has had a first order effect on inequality. It’s not even completely clear to me that it’s made it worse, because what’s the alternative?

Let’s suppose they had done none of this monetary policy, and let us suppose as I believe we had had a much deeper, and we had had a big crash, and lots of unemployed, all of whom are incredibly miserable, or had no wealth—so the answer is, I think, that if they hadn’t done it, the inequality or at least the poverty problem would be worse. And secondly, I think that what’s driving high asset prices is the collapse of real interest rates, and I don’t think that central banks are largely the problem for that.

For those two reasons—I would have preferred to use fiscal policy, everybody knows

I would, but given that we couldn’t use fiscal policy, I tend to think that all the alternatives were worse. But fiscal policy could have been used in a different way.

And just to end, if you were an incoming President of the US, who would be on your Council of Economic Advisors? Who’s your ‘economics dream team’?

That’s a very interesting question. What’s interesting is people have sort of converged, Larry, Joe and Paul [Larry Summers, Joseph Stieglitz, and Paul Krugman] are very much on the same page now.

Apart from them—they’re pretty smart guys—I like Bob Schiller, I think Bob is great, incredibly imaginative and original. I’d like people with slightly different ideas. I might—the only person on the right—I’d like to have a mixed team—the only person on the right I’d like to have is John Cochran, because he thinks differently.

28 | Tuesday November 17, 2015

Belarus: Europe’s Last Dictatorship?

In Belarus, elections far from free, and government far from changing

Capucine Cogne Undergraduate Student WHERE IS BELARUS? I conducted an informal survey asking this question: the result was that not one person got more than one of the country’s five bordering countries (Latvia, Lithuania, Ukraine, Poland and Russia) correct. Some people even thought it was a city! Not many people seem to know anything about this small country which currently holds an important role in international relations Although Belarus has a history that dates back over 100 000 years, has its own language that dates back to the 10th century (despite not being widely spoken due to the Russification campaigns of the late 19th century and under Stalin), and was one of the most devastated areas in WWII, most

people do not know much about it.

This is largely caused by the fact that the country has had a history of being “added” to other countries, from the Grand Duchy of Lithuania , to the Russian Empire, to Poland.

Yet, this country is likely to hold a place in history as being 21rst century Europe’s last communist-style regime, with a stateled economy, a state hold on the media, and a large secret (although not so secret) policing network.

The EU has imposed sanctions on Belarus because of its unjust regime for 5 years and is currently in the process of lifting them. Why? Because the president, Alexander Lukashenko, dubbed “Europe’s last dictator” and Europe’s longest serving leader, has pardoned six political prisoners.

The sanctions were originally placed on Belarus after the 2010

‘elections’ which were clearly undemocratic: not only were opposition candidates and activists jailed, but also the following protests in Minsk were violently suppressed by the government. The EU should be fighting for human rights, and, of course, these were violated during this election. But, if the EU is going to impose sanctions because of the lack of freedom of speech and brutality of the regime in the first place, why lift them now, when the regime is clearly not going to change?

The head of the OSCE mission, Kent Harstedt, stated that ‘Belarus still has a long way to go towards fulfilling its democratic commitments’. The way the elections were carried out greatly indicate corruption: people were able to vote early from the 6th to the 10th of October, facilitating the manipulation of electoral

outcome, and Lukashenko did not hold rallies, answer questions, or go out of his way to meet voters.

If this doesn’t already essentially prove corruption from the government, the results undoubtedly do: according to the Belarusian government the overall turnout was 87.22% and Lukashenko won a landslide majority with 83.47% of the vote.

The underlying objective of the EU’s lifting of the sanctions is undeniably it’s wish to use Lukashenko as “contact man” with Russia and partner to Ukraine, a peacemaker that he has recently- through, among other things, hosting multiple talks involving both Putin and Poroshenko in Minsk. However, the EU has to be more decisive with its position: if it decides to fight an unfair regime, it should pursue that aim, not change it depending on the

relations of countries surrounding the regime. If not, it sends signals to other countries. The lifting of sanctions simply for elections taking place without mass arrest and the release of the opposition candidates in the 2010 elections from prison undermines the principle of sanctions. Russia, Egypt or many other countries can now see this as evidence that the sanctions imposed on them will eventually be lifted too, without a necessary change in their policy.

Moreover, it does not seem that the dictatorship-like leadership in Belarus is going to change any time soon. Lukashenko has made it clear that he wishes his 11-year old son, popularly known as “Kolya”, who has already attended meetings with Putin and Pope Benedict XVI and accompanied his father in the Independence Day Parade, to become his successor.

State Surveillance A Threat To Civil Liberty

The UK government’s new surveillance program risks creating an Orwellian ‘Big Brother’ state Griff Ferris Postgraduate Student GEORGE ORWELL WOULD be turning in his grave. Just over 30 years late, the dystopian predictions of omnipresent government surveillance in Orwell’s 1984 are edging closer to reality. In 2013, Edward Snowden’s leaking of classified security information revealed that the UK’s intelligence agency, GCHQ , was covertly intercepting vast amounts of private phone calls, emails and internet access data, leading to a huge global outcry. Yet only two years later, the Draft Investigatory Powers Bill, also known as the snooper’s charter, is currently making its way through the legislative process in the UK. Previously blocked by the Liberal Democrats for being “unnecessary” and “disproportionate”, the Bill provides for an unprecedented level of internet usage data collection and online surveillance, regardless of innocence or wrongdoing. Moreover this Bill, which purports to openly legislate for the pre-Snowden undercover surveillance by GCHQ , and has the potential to seriously interfere with civil liberties, has been met with little opposition from the wider British public.

The Home Secretary, Theresa May, contends that the Bill is “vital” for “ensuring law enforcement and the security and intelligence agencies have the powers they need to keep us safe in the face of an evolving threat.” To achieve this, the Bill will provide for “powers to intercept communications, acquire communications data and interfere with equipment.” However, these powers are manifested

in a number of deeply unsettling ways.

The Bill would oblige internet service providers and communications companies to record and hold internet history data for up to 12 months. May has attempted to justify this in that such information is used to pre-empt and prevent terror attacks, “there should be no area of cyberspace which is a haven for those who seek to harm us.” She has further dismissed this vast collection of personal internet data as no more than an ‘itemised phone bill’; a grotesque understatement.

Names, addresses, dates of birth, credit card data, and geographical location data – all this and more is collected and stored on the internet for even basic transactions and usage. In real world terms, this is the equivalent of the government making and retaining a record of everything you do on a daily basis: every house, workplace or other location you visit, what you read or watch, who you speak to, where you shop, and anything else you get up to in your spare time - hardly equivalent to phone records. The government will have access to every minutiae of our online lives, which, for the majority of us, is a much larger part of our lives than we might realise, or care to admit.

Your average internet user, indeed the vast majority of internet users, would not imagine their internet history to be of interest to the authorities; yet this bill allows access not just to the data of those suspected of committing crimes, but to anyone and everyone that the police see fit. The security services can examine this information merely on the authority of a

senior police official, without the need for ministerial or judicial approval. This denotes a clear lack of judicial oversight, and the unacceptable proposition of the police carrying out judicial functions.

The Bill further provides that such companies are legally required to enable government agencies to carry out “equipment interference,” accessing communications “or other private information” held on devices, be they phones or computers. Such access is predicated on the meagre safeguard of a ‘code of practice’ to control the “more sensitive and intrusive” equipment interference techniques. Admittedly, the existing legislation on communications data is lagging behind modern technologies’ rapid advances, and the Bill will indeed bring together and unite a number of piecemeal statutes in this area. However, the grotesque invasion of privacy afforded to the authorities by this Bill is not a justifiable solution to the problem.

May has defended the bulk interception of data which the Bill purports to allow, arguing that all such interception will be subject to necessary checks and balance, notably a rigorous ‘double-lock’ of executive and judicial approval for the use of interception. This requirement of approval from both a cabinet minister and a ‘judicial commissioner’ is supposedly “the strongest safeguards anywhere in the democratic world.”

Yet these safeguards are needed only because this is itself some of the most invasive communications collection anywhere in the democratic world; Edward Snowden noting that the Draft Investigatory

Powers Bill “legitimizes mass surveillance,” and called it the “most intrusive and least accountable surveillance regime in the West.”

Indeed only Russia requires internet service providers to routinely store their customers’s web-logs.

Moreover the civil liberties campaign group Liberty has lambasted the judicial element of the supposed safeguard, deriding the judge’s role as ‘very limited’, and a mere ‘rubber-stamping exercise’ which is ‘not acceptable in a modern democracy’.

Moreover there are fears that, in the context of ever more increasing cyber-attacks, the retention of such vast swathes of private and potentially sensitive data is a hack-ccident just waiting to happen. GCHQ has itself warned that cyber-attacks threatening national security have doubled in 2015, with up to 200 attempted hacks each month. The proposals under this Bill, dubbed the ‘Hackers Charter’ by the Independent, would create a gold-mine of British internet users’ information, just waiting to be breached like the systems of the mobile provider TalkTalk.

In a post-Snowden world, only in the UK is the government brazen enough to publicly attempt to put previously clandestine surveillance proposals on an open and statutory footing. It is as though the Conservatives believe that making these online data collection and surveillance measures above board mitigates their existence; that legalising previously concealed surveillance assuages any previous wrongdoing. And yet there seems to be a fundamental deficit in public awareness of the effect of this Bill; the wider Brit-

ish public are perhaps not aware of how much of their daily lives will be subject to this legislation.

Dr Joss Wright, a Research Fellow at the Oxford Internet Institute, has lambasted the lack of public response. He noted that if this Bill was asking for “bulk collection, retention and access to that kind of data in the real world, there would be uproar” but that for some reason, “because this is the internet,” people are not worried.

This Bill, and the civil liberties it will curtail, will be difficult to oppose in the wake of recent terror attacks. Yet despite appalling events such as the chilling mass-murder attacks in Paris on 13 November, calls for sweeping surveillance measures to combat such extremist violence must be resisted. This Bill must be carefully analysed during the legislative process, and it must be considered whether such invasive proposals are really necessary and proportionate. A middle ground needs to be found between unwanted snooping by the state, unwanted snooping by malicious third parties, and protection from those who would seek to use the internet as both a target and a staging point to cause harm. In the face of such attacks, it is likely that it would take a government stronger than our current Conservative administration to resist the restriction of civil liberties that this Bill intends, and it may yet be left to the House of Lords to rein them in, as was the case recently with tax credit cuts. Should this Bill become law, for the British public the totalitarian “Big Brother” state conceived by Orwell would move that bit closer to becoming reality.

Features | 29

Battered By The Waves, Yet Still She Floats

In the midst of mourning, Paris should barricade its streets against fear Alexander Hurst Features Editor NEARLY A YEAR AGO, TENS of thousands of people gathered at Paris’s Place de la République the night of the attack on Charlie Hebdo. I was among them; the mood of the crowd was respectful, yet defiant as it converged around the statue of Marianne—symbol of the French Republic—that stood in the middle of the square, hand outstretched, frozen in copper and time.

She was ringed with illuminated letters that spelled out “Not Afraid.” The phrase epitomized the sprit of a city and of a nation that took massively to the street in the aftermath of the series attacks on the iconic satirical magazine and the kosher supermarket: mournful, yet defiant.

A year later, the day after France’s worst terror attack ever felt different. Fluctuat nec mergitur, the Latin motto under Paris’s coat of arms appeared in giant words, painted on a wall in front of the statue of Marianne that still bore graffitied words from January. Battered by the waves, still she floats. But the plaza was far from thronging with crowds, as many Parisians followed the governments call to stay home unless absolutely necessary. “Today, Paris seemed cloaked in silence and stillness. The streets, the subway, the Seine, it all felt eerily empty,” a friend posted on Facebook.

In a way, how could it not have been different? The viciousness of the terrorism we witnessed this weekend in in its indiscriminate randomness. No high profile target, no symbolic place. Just any terrace, any street, any concert venue. Another friend was eating in a restaurant across the street from Le Petit Cambodge on Friday night. “I’d say I got lucky,” she told me. “Heard the shots. Flew to the floor. Thought we would die.

If we had picked next door…”

The attacks on Charlie Hebdo and Hyper Kacher were attacks on the principles that underlie a way of life. The attacks of Friday the 13th were attacks on a way of life itself. From its modern outdoor terraces--bathed in heat lamps in the winter, sprayed with mist in the summer--to revolutions, Paris and its streets have been culturally and politically inseparable. Friday was an attempt to divorce Paris from the streets that have played a foundational role in the grande marche of France through history.

“Moreover the émeute [riot] was conducted according to the soundest military tactics. The narrow, uneven, sinuous streets, full of turns and corners, were admirably chosen; the environs of the markets in particular, a network of streets more intricate than a forest...”

So writes Victor Hugo in Les Misérables, describing a failed student led attempt to re-spark the Revolution of 1830 two years later. Barricading the streets of Paris was a focal point and central strategy of popular movements and

revolution for centuries. Though the French invention traces back to 1500’s southern France, it was in Paris that barriques were popularized. Used only sporadically in 1789, barricades nevertheless entered the popular mythology of the Revolution, becoming part of the song, street, and symbol that Delacroix captured in his Liberty Leading the People.

“Paris seemed cloaked in silence and stillness. The streets, the metro, the Seine, it all felt eerily empty,” In this older Paris of narrow, winding, incoherent streets rather than the grand boulevards of today, the barricade was a tactically effective way to occupy space, bending the street to the revolutionary will. As a form of architecture, they restructured the city, necessitating citizen cooperation and redefining neighbourhoods and populations as new passageways were constructed around them, going from house to house, building to building.

The street was a place of resistance, of citizen action, and barricades became a way of turning citizens into participants; the

act of building barricades tore down social divisions and instilled a spirit of solidarity. Throughout the 1800’s, barricading remained a highly French phenomenon—of 155 noted instances of use, 92 of these were in France. More than mere physical constructions, the barricades stood as monuments to this group psychology, the collective action of the people.

When the Baron GeorgesEugène Haussmann re-imagined and transformed the face of Paris, he redesigned Paris’s patchwork of streets into broad boulevards and thoroughfares dotted with public spaces and monuments.

Most likely intentional, with Haussmann himself admitting as much, the wide streets also rendered barricades ineffective, taking away their tactical utility and leaving only their symbolism.

The act of barricading had been a way of questioning what exactly the public was, and how public space lent itself to speech and the assertion and defense of inalienable rights. Yet, inextricably tied to the street, the legacy of the Revolution, and the mythology of the Republic, the barricade and the street continued to claim a central symbolic, almost mythic, place for more than hundred years after ceasing to be tactically relevant.

During the student protests of 1968, an anonymous student leader remarked that all that was needed “to will the revolution” was to start the revolutionary pro-

cess—by barricading the streets.

Organization was seen as a hindrance, and ideology a distraction.

In remarking, “barricades before dialectic,” the student was touching upon the same power of action to create identity and community as was fostered by the constructive act of barricade building.

Separating Parisians then from their streets, is akin to separating them from the mythology of their city and the French Republic itself.

Little surprise that not everyone stayed home; crowds placed flowers at the scenes of attack, dozens ignored police requests and stayed at Place de la République long after sunset to light candles; an unknown man played John Lennon’s Imagine on a piano placed in front of Bataclan. Parisians won’t so easily give up their claim to the street.

“This barricade is made neither of paving stones, nor of timbers, nor of iron; it is made of two mounds, a mound of ideas and a mound of sorrows. Here misery encounters the ideal. Here the day embraces the night, and says: I will die with you and you will be born again with me.”

The street has in so many ways become its own legend. It is the Gallic shrug-off of narratives of declinism and disaffection. A place of identity and national purpose.

The street is Paris’s barricade against fear. It holds the city’s sorrows and reflects back its undying ideas. The sorrow will linger. The ideas will endure.

Fluctuat nec mergitur.

Photo Credit: Christophe Ducampe, Flickr, 2015

30|Tuesday November 17, 2015

The Beaver’s Club Of The Week LSE Kabaddi Malvika Jaganmohan Kabaddi Outreach Officer KABADDI IS A SPORT THAT’S enjoying a revival on the local, national and international stage, and here’s how you can be a part of it right here on campus.

LSE Kabaddi is an energetic, powerhouse team of students dedicated to perfecting their skills in the fast-paced and strategically tricky contact sport that is Kabaddi.

If you haven’t played Kabaddi before, not to worry! This year’s cohort has seen a host of new faces, many of whom have never tried their hand at the sport but have rapidly improved over the first half of term, under the guidance of President and Club Captain, Saajan Keshwala and Kishan Chandrakumar. Newly-elected Vice-President and first-year, Vinod Suresh-John, is also a testament to the influx of fresher talent this year, holding the club in good stead for the next few years to come.

So how is Kabaddi played? Fourteen players are divided into teams of two. Each team sends out alternating “raiders”, who approach the opposition with the aim of touching

as many of them as possible and returning to their own half of the court.

Sound easy?

You need to do this without being tackled by seven players waiting for you to put one step wrong and turn your back. To make it just that little bit more difficult, the raider needs to be repeating the word ‘Kabaddi’ continuously… without running out of breath (and yes, the referees can tell if you’re sneakily inhaling).

Kabaddi originated in India and is now firmly establishing its presence on the UK university scene, with the LSE Kabaddi team competing in the NHSF’s London Zone tournament and National Championships, as well as a tournament conducted by Imperial College Union Kabaddi which invites the country’s eight best university teams to compete.

The club prides itself on the diversity of our members, who hail from France, the UK and Malaysia, to the USA, India and Sri Lanka and we’re eager to welcome more students into our ranks.

Women’s Kabaddi is also serious business internationally and the London university Kabaddi community is eager to make sure that Women’s Kabaddi receives the attention it de-

Ultimate Frisbee Men’s 1s vs Royal Holloway 1s won 15-2 Tennis Women’s 1s vs Sussex 1s won 8-4 Men’s 1s vs Imperial won 8-4 Table Tennis Men’s 1s vs King’s College won 15-2

serves. To that end, Imperial College Union Kabaddi run women’s training sessions from 7-8pm every Thursday while LSE Kabaddi is making efforts to secure our own women’s team.

On the social side, the team has been keen to reach out to AU clubs, most recently organising a social with the Women’s Football team. We hope

to establish more links with other clubs and share Kabaddi with as many students as possible, so that the AU is a cohesive union rather than a body of isolated teams disinterested in each other’s successes.

If you’re looking for a club that is supportive and close-knit, and a sport that pushes your agility, speed and aggression, LSE Kabaddi is definitely

Squash Men’s 2s vs Brunel 2s won 2-1 Hockey Men’s 1s vs Imperial Medics 2s won 5-1 Women’s 1s vs Roehampton 1s won 8-0 Netball Women’s 1s vs Brighton 2s won 48-36

for you!

Training sessions take place on Mondays, 6-8pm, Old Gym. These sessions are mixed. LSE Kabaddi will be competing against Imperial on November 17th at 6pm, Beit Quad, Imperial College. If you’re interested in taking part in women’s training sessions at Imperial College Union, contact kabaddi@imperial.ac.uk

Football Men’s 3s vs Westminster 2s won 3-2 Basketball Women’s 1s vs St Mary’s 1s won 64-14 Men’s 1s vs Imperial College 2s won 38-34 Lacrosse Mixed 1s vs Royal Holloway Mixed 2s won 13-2

Win, Lose or Draw, send your results to sports@thebeaveronline.co.uk

JUST AS THEATRE-GOERS, buskers and residents of central London gently, and with a not insignificant amount of trepidation, found themselves being lulled into a false sense of security due to the foreboding stillness and quiet that like a dense mist had enveloped the WC2H region, pervading every crevice until not a single man, woman nor child could traverse its central plaza without feeling that tranquillity and calm, but equally that unmistakeable sense of impending catastrophe, an old

woman, aged 90, whom other residents had always noted as a person of the utmost wisdom, whose eyes had seen more than could one-thousand cameras, who spoke only when the maintenance of silence would be tantamount to negligence, stepped out onto her balcony and did so tremendously yell: “THEY’RE BACK! THEY’RE BACK! THE LSE ATHLETICS’ UNION – THEY’RE BACK!” And with a vengeance, at that.

Save for the economists, financiers, accountants, statisticians and others of that ilk, the Zookeepers were given momentary respite as a sizeable portion of the LSE took a week off to go to Reading. Our return was rewarded with a night of imperialthemed fun, as the Triumvirate (x2) at the summit of the Union, led by their very own Julias Caesar, decided

to celebrate Empire by dressing us up in togas and draining us financially while offering absolutely nothing in return.

After a quite literally deafening start to the night, the leashes could no longer hold those most keen to Head off to Zoo. Entry was awarded to even the most clattered of folk – hats off, or rather, on, to DJ Entertainment®, who were recently recipients of an angel investment and of one billion British pounds – one Kaind and generous footballer opted for a professional foul to secure an early bath, as he Lux across the room and sees a real Gem among the masses.

Later on, the Zoo Bar moved closer to its target of total and complete emulation of its namesake institutions, by caging one particularly Luse chap after he turned down the chance to use his 3 lifelines. An

equally drunk man, perhaps even identically drunk, evaded detention and a Grilling from security, and, to be quite Franc, considered himself very Fortunate to not find himself waKing up next to his detained partner in crime. Nor was criminality limited to the male species either, as an infamous über thief on parole Hankered after one fellow, begging that he reach-out his hand in a manner consistent with what is expected of someone in his new executive role.

Really good to be back, then, I guess is the only thing left to say.

Those that took a week’s hiatus noted towards the end of the night that absence really does make the heart grow fonder. A welcome rest allowed those people not only a chance to recharge batteries, but also appreciate what we have. Those that didn’t, don’t worry, Reading’s a shithole anyway.

Sport | 31

LSE Women’s Sport Leading the Way

With more Women playing sport at LSE than ever before, success can only follow India Steele Deputy Sports Editor SINCE ARRIVING AT LSE IT seems obvious to me that the profile of girl’s sport has not only increased but also improved massively. LSE sport looks to be moving parallel with the common trend at the international level where women, both individually and in teams, are being increasingly accepted and appreciated such as is evident in the increased awareness of the success of the England Women’s Football, Rugby and Hockey teams as well as individuals in Swimming, Athletics, Tennis and many more sports.

Since I joined LSE it has been noticeable how women’s sport seems to be on the up. The Women’s 1st hockey team last year managed to complete an unbeaten season, thus being promoted and winning the BUCS Cup; this team was made up mostly of freshers and the second team had a huge influx of players new to hockey who really enjoyed improving at the sport and being part of a fun and welcoming environment. Women’s football has also seen the number of girls training more than double in 2 years and their joining the BUCS league last year, giving them two matches a week has allowed more girls of all abilities to play competitively and enjoy being part of a team. In fact the Football club’s training sessions are hosted by Coram Field’s Youth Charity for free within the charity’s campaign to encourage young women’s sport. Women’s rugby has also grown exponentially, for the 2012-13 season women’s rugby had just 15 members but three years later they now have 83 members meaning they do not only have a 1st and 2nd team but also a development squad. Last week LSE Women’s

rugby made history by fielding both a first and second team, kicking off their BUCS league campaigns. As a club they won the #trainlikeengland campaign earlier this year which meant they had the opportunity to go to Twickenham, meet the Men’s rugby team and train with the players.

1st team Rugby captain, Eloise Rennie, said “players say that the sport makes them feel united, strong and powerful as women…It is really important for us as a club to exemplify that rugby is not just a mens game, women have and will continue to be successful in the sport and LSE has witnessed a huge growth in it over the past few years.”

Netball has also become much more inclusive with weekly beginner’s sessions as well as casual matches and more training sessions in general.

Roisin Bennett-Odlum, netball’s club captain said: “We want to be able to welcome anyone into the club and develop their skills in netball to improve the club for the better”.

The rise of professionalism amongst Girl’s sport at LSE has also been shown by how more sports such as Netball, Hockey and Rugby are doing separate gym sessions in order to improve their physicality. Personal Trainer Grace Lindsey has begun a hugely successful women’s-only class called ‘Diva Train’ which has been a massive hit; encouraging girls of all fitness abilities into working out and enjoying exercise.

I think it is safe to say that this trend is certainly a positive one for LSE and I’m sure I’m not alone in hoping that girls keep up their participation and enjoyment in University Sport and looking forward to hearing of more successes to come!

VISIT US AT BEAVERONLINE.CO.UK OR TWEET @BEAVERONLINE

LSE Community Come Together: Tackling Sexism & Homophobia In Rugby Section Editor: Alex Dugan Deputy Editor: India Steele

Suyin Haynes News Editor

Sport

TUESDAY 10TH NOVEMBER saw an extremely important event for the sporting and wider LSE community take place: Tackling Sexism and Homophobia in Rugby, hosted by the LSESU Men’s Rugby Club, the LSE Athletics Union and the LSE Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Taskforce.

Chaired by James Taylor, of LGBT+ rights charity Stonewall, the event took place in the Venue of the Saw Swee Hock, with a high turnout rate of members of AU clubs, the LSE community both past and present, and students from the University of Nottingham’s Voice Your Rights campaign amongst the audience.

Tom Carmichael, event organiser and Outreach Officer of the Men’s Rugby Club, opened the discussion by noting that the leafleting scandal of last year had provided the club with an opportunity for positive change, and welcomed the diverse range of speakers whom had been invited to “raise awareness, educate and inspire”. First to the platform was Nigel Owens, one of the top rugby referees in the world, having only recently refereed the World Cup Final, and the first openly gay man to referee at the top levels of the sport.

He spoke movingly of his experiences growing up in a small villlage in west Wales, noting that he had “never met a gay person in my life” within his community. Reflecting upon his struggles with depression, eating disorders and drug addiction during his early 20s and how he overcame that to achieve so much, eventually

becoming Stonewall’s LGBT Sportsperson of the Decade after receiving an incredibly positive reaction to his coming out, Owens’ passionate message to the hushed and inspired audience was that “one of the biggest challenges in life is accepting who you are...nobody should have to make the choice between being who they are or participating in the sport or role that they love”.

Up next to the stage was Kate Rowan, an acclaimed Irish sports journalist specialising in rugby and one of the only female writers working in this field today. Rowan provided the perspective of having face sexism within the sporting arena, particularly within the sports journalism industry, and her anecdotes of this were powerful and shocking.

She noted how at key international test matches, she would often be ignored by male colleagues, or simply reduced to being there only to “pull a player”. Her talk was heartwarming and delivered with passion; it was especially interesting for her to link to sociological ideas, and note that the obstacle female sports journalists need to overcome is the apparent requirement of reclassifying themselves in the contemporary rugby press box to fit the identity of masculinity. Rowan finished her talk by sharing her personal motto with the audience, carried in the back of her writing notebook everyday: “don’t let the bastards grind you down”.

The question and answer session then opened up the discussion to the wider panel, which included Claire Purdy, the former international England rugby player and captain; Heather Taylor of the ‘This Girl Can’ campaign for Sport Eng-

land; and Pedro Dias Ferreira of the King’s Cross Steelers, the world’s first gay and inclusive rugby union club.

The chair asked Purdy what change she had seen in the sport over the past 14 year, and her response noted the continuous elements of sexism but praised the improvements that had been made, notably the merger of women’s rugby into the Rugby Football Union, which brought prestige and a sense of belonging to the women’s game. Heather Taylor spoke briefly about the ‘This Girl Can Campaign’ which launched in January, and noted her aims in creating a culture of allowing women to succeed in British sport both at the grassroots and executive levels. Lastly, Dias Ferreira commented on the success of the King’s Cross Steelers, celebrating their 20th year this year, noting that it was a safe place for its member where “you don’t have to have a second life”. Due to time constraints, the question and answer segment with the audience was kept brief, but the panel answered questions on the different responses to sexism within the sport and Owens explained how he, quite literally, came out of the closet on Welsh television.

The event ended with a video created by LSESU with members of the AU, General Secretary Nona Buckley-Irvine and Women’s Officer Lena Schofield among those included, noting the successes of the AU in moving beyond the events of freshers’ fair last year. Reflecting on the event, Tom Carmichael, told the Beaver: “I think the message that has come from the event is the importance of showing respect to others and understanding the experiences

that other people have, whether it’s the difficulties of coming out as being gay, or the pernicious acts of sexism women face on an everyday basis. Banter is hugely important and central to any sports team. Honesty and discussion is the only way to clarify where the line between good banter and disrespect lies.” Looking towards the future of the AU, Julia Ryland, AU President noted “the event shows just how far attitudes are beginning to change towards a more open and inclusive AU. While there is still work to be done I hope we can concentrate on the positive progress that has been made so far.

I hope the event keeps the momentum going and encourages others to take positive steps forward.” In an exclusive interview with The Beaver, Claire Purdy said “it is exciting to see how the LSE Athletics Union has progressed and what your intentions are going forward”, and commented on the pro-active success of the LSE women’s rugby team.

Overall, the event was a success for the LSE Athletics Union, who have clearly worked hard to overcome the challenges of last year.

The LSE community should be proud of and excited by what initiatives the sports community have in store over the coming year, starting with the joint Pride Night being held with the LSESU LGBT+ Alliance this Wednesday 18th November.

Editorial Note: I would like to congratulate the Tuns management team on a succesful AU event night. All problems highlighted at the welcome party were dealt with and it was a very enjoyable evening.