The
Cambridge
16th November 2017 Vol. 19 Michaelmas Issue 4 www.tcs.cam.ac.uk
Protests for Cambridge to ‘come clean’
Student
Chrystel Papi Deputy News Editor
A
t midday of the 14th November, the Zero Carbon Society rallied nearly a hundred Cambridge students to march against the central offices of the University, demanding an end to the institution’s involvement in “climate injustice.” Working with Oxford University’s Climate Justice Campaign, Zero Carbon’s Press Officer, Angus Satow, led Cambridge’s campaign from Magdalene Bridge onto Bridge Street, passing by the Colleges of Trinity and St John’s, along to Market Square past the Senate House, and completed the protest at Old Schools, which houses the main administration of the institution: the Cambridge University’s Offices. The protest comes as a response to last week’s Paradise Papers leak, revealing how the Oxbridge, together with many of their constituting colleges, have committed “tens of millions of pounds” to “multibilliondollar private equity partnerships” primarily based offshore. Cambridge University has attempted to justify its position, and that of its colleges, on the basis of holding the
status of “charities.” A charitable status would not require the institution to pay taxes on investments. Angus Satow responded to this directly, saying “but what kind of charity avoids US taxes with dodgy offshore funds while pumping millions into the destruction of natural world and the global south?” Satow commented, “We all know the history of this institution. A steeped in privilege, a finishing school of the British elite, legitimising projects of class domination, racial domination, and colonial domination. As the Paradise Papers have revealed, that continues to this day.” Until now, public disclosure of the University’s management of financial endowments was rare. These recent leaks, however, contradict what had been the past assurance that Cambridge held only “minimal investments in fossil fuel companies.” Angus repeated throughout the protest: “We’ve marched, we have protested, the University’s governing body region house has voted for divestment. The University College’s Union has voted for divestment. This is supposed to be a democratic university so why have A group of students, led by the Zero Carbon campaign, march through they not divested?” Cambridge centre on Tuesday 14th. Photograph by Noella Chye.
Pitt Club votes to allow female membership
Juliette Brytan Deputy Editor
A
fter 180 years of men-only membership, the ‘resident’ participants of the notorious private Pitt Club elected to allow female members in a vote held last Tuesday. The news comes after years of rumours of infamy, including controversies involving initiation rites and general actions performed by members. From its creation in 1835 as a political and dining society, female participation with the Club has been limited to the position of guests accompanying male members. Whilst males could join the ranks of the association, female contribution faced hurdles. Though the Club’s ambition has become more social than political over the decades, with their website boasting, “The Club’s founders intended the clubhouse to be a meeting place for members and their guests – a place where they could eat and drink in pleasant surroundings”, little has been completed to ameliorate the position of women within the club until now. Their formal statement, released two days after the vote by a Pitt Club spokesman, said: “On Tuesday 7th November, a majority of the resident members of the University Pitt Club voted to elect female members. The Club looks forward to welcoming its first female members.” It is understood that Pitt Club members have been discouraged from speaking to the Press about the recent development.