explores its British side >>insidepullout PLUS: PERSPECTIVESON TIIESTIUKESp|ll4-l5 Beaver 10 February 2009. Newspaper of the London School of Economics Students' Union thebeaveronline.co.uk Arms holdings 'grossty misrepresented director' LSE tracker fund allows investment in arms companies, campaigners say s ¦ Joseph Cotterill LSE director Howard Davies has "grossly misrepresented the facts" in statements on the school's holdings in arms companies, campus activists against the arms trade have alleged. A spokesperson for the LSE Not For Profit campaign said that Davies had "knowingly represented" the school as not having holdings in arms companies, in a Beaver comment piece three weeks ago. Anti-Gaza war protesters separate from the Not for Profit campaign also demanded during their occupation of the Old Building in the same week that LSE should divest firom BAE Systems, a company which manufactures armaments and ammunition. Davies denied in a letter to the occupiers that the School held direct investments in BAE. "Nor do we have any similar investments in any other arms companies," he said. Davies said in the letter that the School held some endowment money in a tracker fund called Charitrak, in the form of equities "which change from time to time". In the letter, dated 16 January, Davies added that Barclays, the fund's administrator, "have today confirmed that the Charitrak fiind does not hold any BAE shares." Not for Profit activists contend that the Charitrak tracker fiind frequently moves money in and out of arms companies as part of daily trading on the markets. "As an ex-chair of the Financial Services Authority, Howard Davies knows that tracker funds invest in many different sectors," said Michael Deas, a Not for Profit spokesperson. "The director has made it look like we were acting on false information, when we were not," he added. Deas conceded that the Not for Profit campaign does not have access to information on current holdings in Charitrak. Student campaigners say School officials told them it was "extremely clear" that the school held money in arms companies through the Charitrak fimd from time to time, in a meeting held during the occupation. LSE did not respond to the allegations against Davies when approached for comment. "Council has set up a working group to look at various aspects of socially responsible investment policy at the school and the group will report back to council in due course," a school spokesperson said. t rs a The Not for Profit campaign said that even indirect holdings were unethical. Deas said making a distinction between direct and indirect investment was "little more than rhetorical" and made no difference to the large sums of money the School was placing in the Charitrak fund. "Even one or two per cent of this investment is a lot of money if it goes to arms companies," Deas said. LSE invested £55 million in Charitrak in the 2008 financial year, up from £37 million in 2006. Equities holdings are popular with charities and universities as stable and diversified sources of income. Barclays Global Investors managed £2.3 billion for 1,700 UK charities in 2007, including Charitrak. King's College London holds two-thirds of its endowment in equities. Much of this is currently invested in the Charitrak fund. Deas said it did not matter tha!t many other institutions besides the LSE placed money in Charitrak. Not for Profit protestei-s delivered a petition to Howard Davies' (below) office on Monday. Four hundred signatories called for LSE to move away from 'pro-business' policies Clieirie Leung "Most charities are small and haven't woken up to this," he said. Deas added that the School had special responsibilities not to get involved in arms companies. "LSE is supposedly dedicated to the betterment of humanity. It's slightly hypocritical to set up conflict resolution centres and also flind wars," he said. The LSE Council has previously considered the United Nations Principles of Responsible Investment as a guideline for LSE's investment strategy. Council members decided that more research was needed and set up a working group to look at the issue. No date has so far been given for the completion of the group's work. "We wiU wait for their findings - that is the process," the school spokesperson said. Not for Profit activists say they will submit a paper to the School Council in favour of divestment instead.. Ethical investment has been a political issue on Houghton Street since 2006. Activists at other universities have campaigned for their institutions to avoid investing in arms companies. Proposals for Cambridge university to divest fiom arms company holdings were released last week. LSE accused of excessive scrutiny over room bookings AliMoussavi &Ra)anPatei Certain groups of LSE academics and students allegedly face extensive scrutiny when attempting to book rooms for pro-Palestinian events. Several emaO exchanges between academics and LSE Conferences across 2008 show that certain student and staff groups with room booking rights often have their credentials questioned and cannot book rooms for free. This is done on the grounds that there has been some degree of external involvement in organising events on the topic of Palestine. The students and academics spoke to the Beaver on condition of anonymity. Senior school officials, including Howard Davies' Director's Management Team, decide that certain events are not 'LSE events' and that LSE staff and students who are organising them should pay to book an LSE room. When one such decision was questioned by academics in an email chain, LSE Director of External Relations Robin Hoggard was unable to define an 'LSE event'. He said that there are no specific rules which define what constitutes an 'LSE event'. Hoggard told the academics that they should raise the matter wdth the LSE's Pro-Directors, Professors George Gaskell, Janet Hartley and Sarah Worthington. He then said: "In the circumstances, however, I would have to question whether it would be worth your whOe. We don't have formal written rules on what defines a School event." In this particularly email exchange, the ultimate reasoning behind the Pro-Direc-tors' final decision that this was not an LSE event was not explained to the academics. LSE Staff Against the War, an approved staff group, was asked to pay over £2,300 to book rooms for a conference on the plight of Palestinians after the 1948 War. The conference was to include LSE academics as chairs and speakers and was intended "in the first instance for LSE staff, to which all members of the School will be invited, along with interested individuals from outside the School." Alan Revel of LSE Conferences asked LSE Staff Against the War to give him names of its officers, its number of members and its constitution and terms of reference. Revel claimed that all student societies submit this information to him on an annual basis. Students' Union Treasurer Wil Barber said: "Perhaps there is some confusion, the only information we passed on to Conferences is the room booking form for each society". Revel also told the group that under no circumstances were they to represent the event as being "for or on behalf of the LSE". The event ultimately did not go ahead. LSE Staff Against the War is an official LSE staff group which exists on a similar basis to a Students' Union society. Established in 2003, the group has since had room booking rights on LSE for You. They had never faced any such questions when booking rooms in the past. >> Continued on page 4 The Beaver 1 lo February 200g Collective Raidev Akoi; Emmanuel Akpan-Inwang; Hasib Baber; Fadhil Bakeer-Markar; Vishal Banerjee; Wil Barber; Peter Barton; Rams^ Ben-Achour; Graeme Birrel; Julian Boys; Jambs Bull; Mike Carlson; Jess Cartwright; Beth Chenyman; Elizabeth Cheesbrough; Angela Chow; Joseph Cotterill; Jonathan Damsgaard; Elle Dodd; Catl^Dnice; Marie Dunaw;Qr;Holli Eastman; Louisa Evans; Ossie Fikret; Aled Dilwyn Fisher; Charlotte Gahrin; Justin Gest; Erica Gomall; Lucie Goulet; Aula Hariri; Yisum Heneghon; Charlie Hodgson; Tahi ^ Islam; Felipe Jacome; Daniel Jason; Lois Jeaiy; Megan Jones; Yisum Heneghon; Naeem Kapadia; Pooja Kesavan; Sadia Kidwai; Marion Koob; Helen Roberts; Plqrllis Lui; Zeeshan Malik; Nizar IHanek; Nada Mans^ Sophie Marment; Jamie Mason; Trent Maynard; James McGibney; Liam McLaughlin; Nitya Menon; Ir£ui Merali; Anna Mikeda; Ravi Mistry; Ali Moussavi; Deotima Mukherjee; Utsa Mukherjee; Aditi Nangia; Rachael O'Rourke; Aba Osunsade; Anup Patel; Rajan Patel; Will Perry; Chloe Pieters; Danielle Priestlqr; Rahim RahemtuUa; Dominic Rampat; Anjali Raval; Helen Reeves; Ricl^ Ren; Joe Rennison; Sacha Robehmed; Joe Sammut; Charlie Samuda; Thienthai Sangkhaphanthanon; Amrita Saraogi; Christina Schimdt Zur Nedden; Dan Sheldon; Andre Tartar; Sam Tempest-Keeping; Keny Thompson; Meiyem Torun; Molly Thicker; Vladimir Unkovski-Korica; Subash Viroomal; Simon Wang; Jonathan Weir; Chris Westgarth; Sean Whittington Roy; Christine Wl^e; Chris Wilkins; Chun Han Wong; Calum Young The Collective is The Beaver's governing bof^. You must have three articles or photos published in the paper to qualify for membership. If you believe you are a Collective member but your name is not on the list above, please email Collective Chair Lucie Goulet collective(a)tliebeaveronline.co.uk Editorial Boafd Executive Editor Joseph Cotterill editor@thebeaveronline.co.uk Managing Editor Chun Han Wong managing(a) thebeaveronline.co.uk News Editors Ali Moussavi Zeeshan Malik Joe Rennison news(i) thebeaveronline.co.uk Comment Editor Sean Whittington Roy connnent@thebeaveronline.co.uk Features Editor Shibani Mahtani features@thebeaveronline.co.uk Social Editor Madeeha Ansari 80cial@thebeaveronline.co.uk The Beaver is printed on 100% f recycled paper. In f 2006, recycled paper I made up 79% of UK L newspaper raw materials. Please recycle your copy Sports Editors Sam Tempest Keeping Alice Pelton sports@thebeaveronIine.co.uk PartBEditors Julian Boys S^chin Patel partb@thebeaveronline.co.uk Design Editor Mike Carlson design@thebeaveronline.co.uk Photo Editor Cherie Leung photo@thebeaveronline.co.uk General Manager SanjivNanwani info@thebeaveronline.co.uk Web Editor Srikanth Narayanamohan web@thebeaveronIine.co.uk Contact the Beaver info@thebeaveronline.co.uk 0207 955 6705 East Building LSE Students' Union London WC2A 2AE The Beaver wotdd like to thank the LSE students who contributed to this issue. The Beaver is published by the London School of Economics' Students' Union, East Building, Houghton Street, WC2A 2AE. Printed at Guardian Print Centre, Rick Roberts j/Vay, Stratford, London E152GN. The Beaver uses pictures from flickr.com which have been issued under a Creative Commons license. We would like to distribute the Beaver under a similar license - we'll keep you posted. You can browse through the pictures we post to flickr at: flickr.com/photos/beaveronline. LSE events Highlights of this week's public lectures and talks China's Democratic Futture Chatham House senior fellow Dr Kerry Brown speaks. Tonight, D202,1700-1800 Keeping Score: new approaches to the standard of living With Prof Richard Steckel. Tonight, SZT, 1830-2000 A^hanistan and Iraq: good war, bad war? UN supremo Lakhdar Brahimi in conversation with Prof Mary Kaldor. Wednesd^,HKT,i830 LSE talent concert Hidden student and staff stars. Thursdsgr, Shaw Library, 1305-1400 Where to find European Values? European human rights court judge Andras Sajo with Prof Conor Gearty. Thursday, OT, 1830-2000 Contemporary Islam Idris Tawfiq caps ofFDiscover Islam Wefek. Frid^, HKT, 1800-2000 Online Prof Luis Garicano discusses incentives in credit crunches and football matches bit.fy/whge Cybemetically enhanced Beaver. I ¦4r i The Beaver's digital revolution continues. Now on twitter! twitter.com/beaveronline Let us know where to go next: info(a)thebeaveronline.co.uk The Beaver thebeaveronline.co.uk Positions of the week LSE careers service's pick of the best jobs Deloitte, multiple graduate opportunities in China, Spain, Middle East, South Korea and South East Asia through the Global Universities Programme, Deloitte's newest initiative to match , top international students from select universities with career opportunities in their home country or another location of interest. Barclaycard, graduate trainees in HR, Marketing, Risk and Com- h mercial Programme The Environment Council. Finances Assistant and Public and Stakeholder engagement assistant positions Internship opportunities at Societe Generale, including IT Trainee, ^thetic credit structuring... MVA Consultancy-graduate . anafyst / researcher. As a graduate Anafyst you wiO be working in a busy transport consul- . tanty. You findyourseif contributing to a major piece of policy % research for a central Government department, a transport assessment in connection with a private residen-tial or commercial developer, develr ^ opment; of a transport strate^ for city or region, or abid for a railw^ or y toll road franchise, or for a new train 'V; system. • ^ 3 M - Graduate opportunities, in business, IT, science, manufacturing and engineering. KPMG Investment Advisory is a high growth area within KPMG's Pensions Practice, providing a wide range of services toCorporate and Pension Trustee clients. We adinse on investment-related subjects including asset allocation, financial risk management and fund manager selection. We operate in a fast-paced investment / capital markets environment that requires a wide range of skills and technical abilities, as well as business acumen. De Beers. Junior Product Manager/ Ana^t - Marketing Internship. Joint-venture between De Beers and LVMH, De Beers Diamond Jewellers Ltd. is based in London and operates 50 stores around the world. This internship is proposed within the Head-Ofifice Marketing Department doing the product strategy for all the markets. Policy Advisor to the Communications Consumer Panel. Associate. The role of the Communications Consumer Panel is to influence Ofcom, Government, the EU, and service and equipment providers so that the communications interests of consumers and citizens are protected and promoted. Interested? For details of these posts and over three hundred more, log in to My Careers Service and click on 'search for opportunities' at www.lse.ac.uk/careers News 3 10 Februaiy 200g | The Beaver Bursaries delayed foi* hundreds of students in loans company erroi* The Student Services Centre. Photo: Mike Carlson School organises shoi't-term loans as students await pa3mients Joe Rennison LSE is blaming the Student Loans Company for an error that has left hundreds of students still waiting to receive their financial bursaries. Seven hundred LSE students are awarded bursaries based on their financial situation. The bursaries are paid in instalments at the start of each term by the Student Loans Company. LSE student services only became aware that the second installment had not yet been paid to students on 5 February. LSE Financial Support Manager Sue Platter said that the Student Loans Company had been at fault and had not notified the financial support office in time. "The process from our end had all gone according to plan, and my colleagues had both followed up on it during January to check that all was well," Platter said. "It seems that our contacts at the Student Loans Company thought that all was fine, and only realised yesterday [5 February] that the office which carries out this process had run into a problem, which either they did not realise or they did not tell anyone about," she added. Jon Nolan, a second-year sociology student still writhout his bursary,'said: "Student services have said it's entirely a fault with the Student Loans Company, not LSE's fault. They were told that it would be in tomorrow [6 Februaiy], but that's been put back again and no one has any idea of when it is coming in now." Amy Noble, a second-year law student affected by the problem, said she had expected to receive her bursary in week one. The situation was "absolutely appalling," she said. Sakine Koc, a second-year sociology student also waiting for her bursary, said: "LSE has been really helpfld itself, it's just the Student Loans Company that's the problem." She continued: "For students from a low income family and who have to live in London, this is a really difficult situation." Platter said that the school was acting to help affected students. "Even now the Amy Noble, still waiting for her bursary, called the situation, "absolutely appal-ing." Student Loans Company cannot confirm how many students are affected, but they and we are assuming it is all of them," she said. We have emailed the students to let them know of the problem, which of course some of them had spotted," Platter added. The new projected date for bursary payments to arrive in students' accounts was 18 Februaiy, she said. Student services are offering short-term loans to students in financial difficulty. The Accommodation Office confirmed that they will grant extensions for rent payments from affected students. Koc, who works in the Students' Union's advice and counseling centre, added that the loans take at least a week to process. "If someone needs an emergency loan it'll take them at least a week to get it," she said. The Student Loans Company declined to comment on the issue. NAB energy efficiency faces teething problems Katherine Ripullone The New Academic Building recently received the lowest government energy rating of G despite it being awarded a design rating of "excellent" by the independent BRE environmental assessment method (BREEAM) awards. The low government rating is reportedly used until a year's worth of data has been collected, afier which point, the data will be assessed and the official rating specified by the School. The rating is calculated by comparing the actual energy consumption of the building over twelve months against the expected energy consumption of a building of its kind. A rating of "A" has zero CO2 emissions while a rating of G has over twdce the typical CO2 emissions for a UK building. Most buildings are registered in the D and E categories. Estates development manager Julian Robinson said that even wdth reassessment "we wouldn't get more than a C". A final energy rating of C could be seen as problematic if it means that the school would not recoup its losses for the increased upfront investment it made in order to make the NAB environmentally friendly. According to Robinson, the LSE paid a premium of 5 per cent to get the "Excellent" BREEAM certificate. He said it was still too difficult to predict whether the school would in fact recoup the increased investment but he did point out that the project had been delivered on-time and under-budget. Robinson added that a building designed from scratch would be able to achieve an A rating, but the predetermined aspect and site of the NAB severely limited the design team, forcing them to use more energy-intensive systems. Air conditioning, for example, had to be installed in the rooms facing Kingsway due to the excessive noise that would come from opening the v^indows. At present there are no A rated buildings on campus. The School has been criticised by students for its lack of visible follow-through regarding issues of sustainability. Environment and ethics officer Justus Rollin said: "The school could go much fiirther with sustainability issues." In response Julian pointed out that the Estates division had conducted a fiill environmental audit of all buildings on campus, which produced a list of suggestions with their associated costs and benefits. Future projects will include the refurbishment of Connaught House this summer, and the carbon-neutraliaation of the sports grounds. For the new Students' Union building, Robinson hopes to propose a BREEAM target of "Outstanding". Rollin added: "I .would give the school credit for pursuing certain sustainable aims but there are still certain individuals who are reluctant to take on a pro-active approach. While there is no official sustainable building policy for the school, Julian said that the NAB represents the way the School is "approaching building, long- term mamtenance and capital, not office, development". Although it is not official policy, he predicts that, "all new buildings wiU have to have a high BREEAM rating. The school has seen now that it is achievable within a reasonable budget". News The Beaver [ lo Febmaiy 2009 m TIMELESS! Photo Picture special page 21 Governor diversity data provoke relevance debate Y Students outside the Old V Building last tenn \ PFioto: Ei-ik Lang 1 AliMoussavi & Phyllis Lui Under one per cent of LSE's governors come from an ethnic minority, a Beaver survey has shown, raising questions over how far one of the school's most influential institutions represents the school's student body. Twenty-five per cent of governors are women, compared to a student body that is 51 per cent female. Approximately 78 per cent of governors are over the age of 50, with 40 per cent older than sixty. The Court of Governors is second only to the school's Council and the Director's office in helping to set school policy. The governors' constitutional terms of reference include "pre-decision dis- 0.9% Proportion of LSE governors who come from an ethnic minority 25% Proportion of LSE governors who are female 51% Proportion of LSE students who are female cussions on key policy issues and the involvement of individual governors in the school's activities." Approximately ninety governors currently sit on the court. Governors are drawn from alumni, donors, and academics selected by the school's Academic Board. Five are student representatives, elected in Michaelmas term. The student representatives were not included in the Beaver's sampling of the Court's diversity. Daniel Sheldon, a student representative on court and the Students' Union's communications officer, said he was dismayed at the findings. "For such a diverse institution as LSE, it is both surprising and disappointing to leam that our governing body is so unrepresentative," he said. "I hope the School accelerates their plans to reflect the diversity of our students and alumni in the Court of Governors," Sheldon said. School accused of excessive scrutiny over room bookings >> Continued from page 1 In a similar instance, a renowned LSE research centre tried to book a room , for a speaking event with Hanan Ashrawi, the founder of the Palestinian Initiative for the Promotion of Global Dialogue and Democracy and a former Palestinian negotiator in the Middle East peace process. Revel included the head of LSE Security Paul Thombury in the email chain about the event. He then asked the research centre staff for extensive information qn the event, including liaison, publicity and contact details. He also suggested that the event be ticketed "both because of the sensitivity of the topic and the likely popularity of the event". The event's organisers were the LSE research centre, the LSE Students' Union Palestine Society and the Council for Arab British Understanding. Ultimately, the Council for Arab British Understanding, who were liaising v«th Ashrawi, moved to the event to the School of Oriental and African Studies because they felt that "it was much easier dealing with SOAS than LSE v^dth all their questions". At the time, an LSE student organising the event said that the LSE had "just lost a talk by Hanan Ashrawi due to the Conferences Office's McCarthy-style policies." On a third occasion, LSE Conferences decided not to charge the Palestine Society for a room booked for a conference of UK student Palestine societies. When approving the event. Revel informed the student organising the event that "this really does not qualify as a [sic] SU society event as its [sic] for a much wider membership that [sic] your soci- ety and for the benefit of external groups. However since the event is this weekend and we have not picked up on it then we will not look to charge room hire on this occasion." The student responded, "I do not accept the view that the conferences office is doing us a 'favour'". He argued that the meeting would be for the benefit of the Palestine Society on campus and that "meetings like this happen all the time at the LSE". Student societies often use the contacts of external organisations to engage speakers for their events on campus. Political societies, for example, may contact their national party's office to get major politicians to appear at Students' Union society events. The extent of scrutiny on other societies is unclear. A possible review of room booking procedures was discussed by the School's Court of Governors, writh a view to moni- toring extremism on campus. At a meeting in March 2007, it was stated said that the School "was continuing to focus on taking the practical steps to prevent extremism on campus reported to the Court in March, such as reviewing the detail of room booking procedures." When asked to discuss the School's roombookings policy in the context of Good Campus Relations, LSE Pro-Director for Teaching and Learning Janet Hartley declined to comment. However, an LSE spokesperson said: "LSE takes a serious ljut proportionate approach to possible extremism on campus. For this reason it's sensible to keep an overview of events and meetings taking place on our premises." "But the School has not subjected LSE Staff Against The War - or any other group - to individual targeting and extensive questioning, nor will it do so in future," he said. "Where a proposal raises more questions than another, more questions will be gsked, irrespective of the nature of the event." The School has also issued a statement arguing that the distinction which Revel and Hoggard pointed to in the email exchanges does not exist: "The room booking policy defines purely internal and purely external events plus some which fall between. There is no single definition of an "LSE event"." An LSE spokesperson said: "The School aims - indeed has a legal duty - to uphold free speech. As long as an event does not threaten to infringe the law, the School takes no position on the political or other views which may be expressed at an event." "Free speech is protected by a code of practice, which we expect the LSE Council shortly to review and if necessaty update," he added. The School has also denied that particular scrutiny has been directed at any one group of staff or students. 5 * 10 February 2009 I The Beaver News Election refoimis defeated amid Union General Meeting chaos Internet expansion plans for elections threaten fairness, opponents say ' JoeRennison A controversial amendment to the Students' Union's codes of practice on elec-: tions has failed to pass at the Union General Meeting for a second consecutive wreek. The amendment fell despite changes to the original reform proposal being made last week in order to gamer sufficient support for the amendment to pass. The debate centred on candidates being permitted to use the internet to cam-' paign in Union elections. Websites and email canvassing are currently forbidden. The reform would allow for candidates to ' campaign using "all online tools." PhD student Vladimir Unkovski-Kori-ca spoke against the motion. "Unrestricted use of the web for campaigniiig purposes obviates existing rules that ensure equality of opportunity for aU candidates," he said. Unkovski-Korica said that he was not opposed to the use of the internet during elections, but that allowing individual candidates to set up their own websites would marginalise those who did not have the skills to create them. Michael Deas, the second speaker against the motion, attacked the reform proposal's continuing restrictions on internet use. Candidates would not be allowed to send personal messages to any individual on any social network, and Facebook pages relating to the elections would also be forbidden. "To not be able to send your mates a message about elections is stupid," Deas said. Ossie Fikret, the Union returning officer in charge of running elections, drafted the reform. Fikret said that the restrictions had been justified. "We decided to ban personal messages in an attempt to contain spam. We knew people would contact their friends on Facebook, and they'll still do that now regardless of what the rules say," he said. "What we wanted to have was a rule that would be enforceable in case people message the whole LSE network. Would people actually do this? With a £27,000 cheque at the end, almost certainly," Fikret added. The reform also looked to offer greater freedom for the Media Group to report on events regarding the election. Currently the Beaver must offer equal print space to each candidate, meaning that an equal number of words must be printed about each candidate. Pulse radio is limited to broadcasting debates between candidates. Pulse Station Manager Mark Harrison said; "The current codes of practice completely gag the media. The rules are so strict that should one candidate punch another in the face we would not be allowed to report it, it really is that ridiculous." "The electoral reforms are essential for us to be able to provide a balanced, trustworthy news service to inform the electorate and hopefiiUy motivate them to vote," he said. Harrison added that the only source for updates during the election came from satirical blogs such as Hack Attack. Hack Attack and similar blogs have escaped Union regulation since beginning to appear on campus two years ago. The proposed reform would have allowed the Beaver and Pulse to "report news that is both an objective and factual" account of elections. Fikret said that the reform had fallen for a number of reasons. "The most obvious reason is pretty simple - people were confused. Amendments to amendments of amendments make for a pretty conflising vote," he said. Fikret added that there was "another element at work within the UGM". The vast majority of opposition, in fact ^1 of it if I recaU correctly, came firom the same group of people within the UGM -co-incidence? I think not," Fikret said. • "What we witnessed was electioneering and the holding of our democracy to ransom, by a group interested in not maximizing participation, but retaining a stranglehold over the Union," he added. Unkovski-Korica dismissed Fikret's allegation. "That could be suggested only by Aose who stand to gain nothing firom an equal plajdng field," he said. Higher Education & Research * LSE and sector news Cold weather and climate change? Snow relation Despite Britain experiencing the coldest winter in thirty years, scientists maintain that the snowr was in accordance with global warming predictions. The weather is only a short term indicator whereas climate is determined over longer periods of time. Cold bursts like those recently experienced are becoming less frequent as the Earth experiences global warming. Bob Ward, spokesman for the Grantham Research Institute for Climate Change at London School of Economics, said: "Just as the wet summer of 2007 or recent heat waves cannot be attributed to global warming nor can this cold snap." Put children first, says report Professor Lord Richard Layard, Emeritus Professor of Economics at the London School of Economics, was part of an enquiry panel which recently published a report arguing that the individualism and "me-first" ideology of parents is damaging their children's future. The adult pursuit of their own well-being above that of their children is contributing to increased family breakdown and an earlier sexualisa-tion of children, the report found. La-yard said: "We think that the preoccupation with self is taking too much of the joy out of children's lives, out of their family lives, out of their school, even out of their leisure life and consumption." He added: "In short children should think that it is love that is the most important thing in life." Pornography law attacked Andrew Murray, a Reader in Law at the London School of Economics and Political Science, has come out in opposition toward a new law introduced by the government which aims to crack down on extreme forms of internet pornography. The law targets the publication of images which display extreme acts of sexual violence, bestiality or necrophilia. Murray thinks that the law will be impossible to enforce and will instead end up prosecuting those who indulge in legal fetishes like sado-masochism, bondage and domination. Reform or no reform, we'll keep you posted. By the time Students' Union elections hit campus in a month's time, the Union media group's coverage wUl ahready be far in the future. Get ready for a multimedia deluge of broadcasting, blog posting and Beaver reporting, and find out how you can get involved. mimMm TWITTEIt.C0M/V0TE$U09 News The Beaver | lo February 2009 China Week events celebrate coming of the Year of the Ox LSE's Chinese student community took part in a series of lectures, organised a stall on Houghton Street and held an exhibition of pictures taken V students in China (above) as part of Chinese New Year celebrations last week. Joseph Cotterill Bankside students fined after roof party rumbled by wardens Phyllis Lui Students at a LSE residence were fined a combined total of £660 for "dangerously reckless" behaviour last week after a rooftop party went awry. 22 students were caught on the roof and balcony at Bankside House with alcohol, guitars and candles due to the noise they had created. A Bankside warden investigation discovered that a Facebook group had advertised the party. Students who attended the party said they had been unaware that the roof was off limits. One of the students said he had not seen any signs forbidding access. "If there were any, they should have been much bigger and the door should have been locked," he added. Students' Union Residences officer Helen Roberts said she was told by a Bank-side staff member that the roof prohibition was "not specified, but it's just common sense". In an email addressed to the students, the Bankside wardens outlined the penalties for the party, which included the fine' and attendance at a meeting. The students' ' behaviour was "utterly irresponsible," the wardens added. The students collectively decided to accept the penalty and donate the fine to charity. One of the students said he believed the fine to be "rather excessive". "Although now I've accepted the fine," he added, "at first I thought it was unneccessary, as no damage was done." The wardens said during the meeting that the punishment was less severe than action taken by other halls in similar cases in the past, and that it would be veiy unpleasant for them to make the phone calls j to students' parents in the case of injury. j 'I, Mr LSE candidates strut stuff in Quad Rees Sutton was crowned top male of the LSE student boify last week in the Athletic Union's men-onfy beauty pageant. Sutton and seven other contestants underwent a series of challenges in the competition, including a talent show, before a Quad croivd. Miss LSE, a female pageant held by non-Union external organisers.last term, generated national controvert and was condemned women's groups in the Students' Union. Joseph Cotterill Societies' anger at refused entiy to 'party of the year' Jonathan Damsgaard & Marie Dunnaw^ Organisers of a joint society party entitled 'Voulez-Vous?' plan to sue the Vendrome club in Mayfair after the club turned away nearly half of the students attending the £2500 event. Club bouncers started to refuse entry an hour after the start of the party, enforcing an over-21 policy. Many of those who had bought tickets were refused entry for being under 21 but those who arrived and were admitted before the checks started said the club hadn't been asking for age identification on the door. Vendrome had another booking for a party with UK men's magazine Nuts which clashed with the Voulez Vous party. Society president and organiser of the event Nick Oudin said: "The club never told us about this other party". He added that the contract guaranteed the societies exclusivity at the club until 10:30 pm. Society members suggested that entry was reflised to attendees of Voulez Vous so that the Nuts party could take priority. The night, organised by the Franco-British Student Alliance (FBSA), LSE Finance Society and the LSE Fashion Society, in conjunction v\nth Kings College and UCL, was planned and advertised as 'The Party of the year'. The party was a Moulin Rouge themed party with a Can- Can Fashion Show, French v«nes and free drinks for over 300 guests. Oudin continued that there were no terms regulating the age limit of the attendees. The societies had also received written confirmation that their guests would be admitted regardless of age. One student said "even though I was over 21,1 was still not admitted". The Vendome General Manager said that the club reserves the right of entry regarding all customers and such a provision had been incorporated as a standard clause into the contract. The club asserts that it has an 'over 21' policy and the students should have been aware of this. Vendome claims that when a number of students had been refused entry at 10 pm, an incident at the door prompted the establishment to refuse entry to any and all of the guests. The organisers gave refunds on the door to those who arrived and were denied entry. Vendrome has refijsed to reflind any of the fee. The party organizer's agency is planning to sue Vendrome for the problems caused. Oudin, in a message to all those who planned to attend, said: "We did our best to organise a wonderful evening. Everything was planned accordingly and we had been working on this since Week 8 of MT. Please understand that we are extremely disappointed over this and hope that it will not affect your image of our respective societ- nformation Session 2"^ Feb i Ibj-j) 2:00-13:00 Rm S75 \3'n heb i 2:00-13.00 Rm S42 •.r-.:-'f-o-': v." ¦ ruoTJc-'-ni: iGBT fole'''Qrn:e r-V.'Ai r v.:-' j: \v. rlvff doviis« troining ocriv 5 ; r.l-r. p'Cnv^r^ tsra: ove'ittat vciurlettr^ ^' I-••>»:?! J i'rcii CC'r-riivL 'eOVi. cofr News 10 Februaiy 2009 | The Beaver Union a mystexy to most students Beaver survey uncovers widespread lack of interest in Students' Union officials and structures Jonathan Damsgaard Eighty-eight per cent of students do not know what the LSE Students' Union sabbatical officers do, a Beaver survey of almost four hundred students has indicated, fuelling the debate on apathy on campus. Twelve per cent of students surveyed last week could name the four sabbatical roles of General Secretary, Treasurer, Education and Welfare, and Communications. The survey's findings come after the launch last term of 'Your Union', an ongoing consultation with students over the Union's long-term fiiture. The results also follows a complete rebrand of the Union at the beginning of the academic year. Making the Union relevant to students was central to both policies. While 50 per cent of students knew that the sabbatical officers have office hours, most were unable to account for their responsibilities. Seventeen per cent of students were able to name Aled Dilwyn Fisher as the Union's general secretary. A total of 82 per cent were unaware that the role of general secretary existed. LSESU General Secretary Aled Fisher said: "It's not bad. at a high pressure environment like Ise you can't expect everyone to know your name and its pretty good given the communication problems that the SU has faced and are in the process of amending." More students could name the communications officer, Dan Sheldon, than could identify his role in the Union. Sheldon said that the fact more people know his name than know what his job is within the SU, "shows that my superior talents and personality shine through any shortcomings in my role." Only 28 people of the 383 surveyed knew who the LSESU Treasurer was and this was coupled by an similarly low 38 people being able to name the LSESU Welfare officer. Some students said they were broadly aware of the 'academic' and 'welfare' roles of the sabbatical officers. The sabbatical officers form the leadership of the Students' Union's executive. The officers receive a £27,000 salary over the course of a one-year term to manage the Union's staff, services, and overall direction on a full-time basis. Four students are voted into the positions in elections every Lent term. Fulltime students are also elected to societies, antiracism and women's portfolios on the executive, among others. Forty per cent of students said thatthey read the Union's global email. The communications officer sends the email to all students each week to promote Union activities and events. m Percentage of respondents who know Aled Fisher Percentage of respondents who read the Global Email No 58% Yes 42% Survey Results: We sui^^ed 383 students on campus over the past week. Can you name the Sabbatical Officers and their role? 66 people could name Aled Fisher, while 68 people knew our SU has a General Secretary 28 people could name Will Barber, while 39 people knew our SU has a Treasurer 50 people could name Dan Sheldon, while 41 people knew our SU has a communications officer 38 people could name Emmanuel Akpan-Inwang and 38 people knew our SU had a Welfare Officer Are you aware that the Sabbatical officers have office hours? 67% of those students surveyed were not Do you read the Global e-mail? 42% do not "It's a bit surprising that people don't pay attention. If everyone participated in elections then maybe the Sabbatical officers would be more .well known. They are getting a free ride" Nina Mason, Second-year undergraduate "I'm shocked they get paid that much, I only knew [^ed Fisher] through the Beaver. I've not seen him on Houghton Street. ^ Migora, Second-year ¦ Law undergraduate 8 The Beaver | lo February 2009 Advertisement ^ .Vj/ ¦ k! ¦-<;¦, 'A ,Vp rxT^/zS '1\ ^ m^mjm frf:Safe5c2S4!3>> ' 'W% I"-' WV-^:-,^ S''- 1 (/, . .'tV ^tes:::?:^^fl , i''*5 & tjr ^¦. ,v- 7-.r? ;•'.?¦?;'• •"^'"yi Pi >1 m t/^ I ipp XO Lilt ^1, 'K' - ---------------'¦'W-m'-'^- 'm ""i J •'/¦ /•Asa.fe. ^ m i5feS-3 aPi Aiw -M ?T^!: ly-g-lj^-Tri ¦ TI ,;.,__^p:-falP- r if I >.»si A-: t -? •'ik- -iiirf, s*V»S?S --s: i- Quite simply, things are bigger here. There's more of everything more development, more ambition, more international opportunities and a lot more work/life balance too. So, whatever you want from LIFE, visit www^kpmg,co.uk/careers and find out when we're visiting your campus. AUDIT • TAX " ADVISORY Tlie Beaver ! lo February 2009 9 ______I_________ Seeing through the veil: a tool for women's liberty Islam is not compatible with the oppression of women, but instead gives them freedom MiraHammad AnjaKrausova LSESU Feminist Society Chair It is not often that the label of oppression is tacked onto a people who are not oppressed. TTiroughout history, people have had to struggle for recognition of their suffering, no matter how real it is. For Muslim women living in the West, however, Western media and popular thought makes the assumption of oppression readily: based not on a real understanding of Islam or of the lives of Muslim women, but on a false' supposition that any way of life which dares to be so wholly and perceptibly different from their ovm must in some way be less valid and lacking in the qualities which the West has claimed to belong to it alone, such as "freedom" and "equality". The truth is that a celebrity- and image-obsessed media cannot comprehend the philosophy of women who choose to wear veils and to abandon the norms prescribed to them by a narrow-minded society. So they choose to explain away this life choice by placating themselves with the belief that these women have not made a conscious, informed, decision but have simply been forced to live in a certain way by their domineering male family members. Last year a friend of ours, living in Leeds, noticed ITV cameramen filming people while she was shopping on the high street. She thought no more of it until she watched the news and saw statistics about forced marriage in Britain were being set to a backdrop of an image of her walking down the street. Clearly, the fact that she wears hijab had nothing to do with this interesting choice of background. The irony is that forced marriage is expressly forbidden in Islam, a fact that I have never heard mentioned in the mainstream media despite the discussions that crop up every few months regarding forced marriage. The newspapers, too, are peppered with their fair share of patronising and misplaced attempts to "liberate" women from the influence of Islam - as seen in an article in the Guardian, which, referring symbol of oppression, or liberation? ^hoto: fliclcr user See Wah to Islam, claimed that "Women are always the main victims, since extreme religions express their identities through... disgust of women." Call me presumptuous, but I feel that if I am to be treated as a victim I should at least be allowed the privilege of being one. I would also like an explanation as to how any religion which refers to Paradise as being "at the feet of your mother" can also paradoxically hold any kind of disgust for women. It is not that I am ignorant of the effect of the misinterpretation of Islam on the common perception of the faith. I can comprehend, in a world where so-called 'Muslim countries' such as Saudi Arabia propagate rules like the law forbidding women from driving, why many people who are ignorant of the tenets of Islam could assume that sexist policies are indeed - as the Saudi Arabian government claims - part and parcel of the Muslim message. What these people fail to realise, however, is that the word 'Islam' is used as a shroud by some governments in Arab Mr LSE: harmless fun The pageant did not seek to undermine feminism; it was tongue-in-cheek Danielle Priestley Contrary to some expectations, last Wednesday's Mr LSE competition was a highly enjoyable night off -not senseless mockery, but classic parody. I consider myself a feminist in terms of the fact that I advocate equal rights for the genders in education, work, sport, society, and all other possible aspects of life, and I denounce certain realities, such countries in order to mask their ovm repressive regimes and to fuel the pretence that their actions are not propelled by greedy self interest but are the result of some higher belief system. Anyone who has studied Islam in any level of depth or openness will realise that not only is this a complete fallacy, but Islam and sexism are also a complete contradiction in terms. In a religion which believes that men and women were created "from a single soul" in order to be "partners" the idea of a two tier system where men are treated on a higher level than women is surely abhorrent. The point, however, is that in the same way that people recognised that the white supremacists' use of Christianity to justify their actions in South Africa was totally erroneous and completely at odds with Christianity, so too is the use of Islam to justify any form of subjugation of women. The problem is, while people in the West were very aware of the Christian faith, and so could see by themselves the level of distortion applied, their position on Islam is by and large one of ignorance. In order to achieve a true perspective on what Islam means for women, and indeed as a whole, people need to look not at "Muslim" countries and the model of Islam they claim to stand for but at the religion itself. Initiatives such as the LSESU Islamic Society "Discover Islam Week", which is taking place this week, are a perfect platform from which to do so. So, you maybe asking, if Islam does not stand for oppression, then what does it stand for, in relation to women? For me, it is tantamount to liberation, not repression. I say this as someone who has tried out several different philosophies and genuinely found Islam to be the one that delivered the deepest sense of freedom. Growing up, I had always been a 'passport Muslim', but I only really decided to embrace Islam a couple of months before I came to university. It was also at this time that I started to wear a headscarf - a garment that many Western commenta- as the fact that single female pensioners are more likely to live in poverty than their male counterparts, and diat rape is an endemic and under-prosecuted problem in our society. However, it is extremely misguided, unhelpfiil, and even offensive, to link the endurance of these and other abhorrent statistics to the phenomenon of the beauty pageant, and particularly to the lowly Mr LSE competition. What many seem not to realise is that the Athletics Union is made up of a roughly equal number of males and females, as is the AU executive, which made the decision to put on the Mr LSE competition. The AU is not a misogy-nistic institution that seeks to mock the achievements of feminism, but a group of students who generally found the School and nationwide reaction to December's Miss LSE competition frankly a bit over the top. Don't get me wrong; I think beauty pageants are rather silly and archaic, and there were aspects of Miss LSE which any decent, respectful human being should oppose, including the taking of the participants' measurements on stage. But I'll concentrate my energies on denouncing that aspect of the competition, not the competition itself, just as women in football or rugby, for instance, concentrate their energies on raising the profile of women's sport and removing barriers to participation, rather than condemning the sport as a whole. Just as many comedians seek to derive amusement from the parod3ang of serious topics, so the organisers of Mr LSE sought to derive amusement from the semi-seri-ous topic of the beauty pageant and recent reactions thereto. Ed Healy, AU Communications Officer, said that "when we came up of the idea of Mr LSE, there was no intention of mocking Miss LSE what so ever. When we first came up with the idea, we wanted tors seem to regard as the ultimate symbol of oppression. I consider the decision to wear it to be the best I have ever made. It is difficult to explain the significance of wearing hijab to those who haven't experienced it. It is an immensely satisfying feeling to transcend societal standards which are based around the objectification of women and ascend instead to a level where women are not expected to be shallow sex symbols but are judged as valid human beings. It is a statement that for us, at least, there is more to life than appearance and women do not have to resort to plastic surgery and laborious beaufy processes in order to be recognised as being of worth. Islam should be recognised as a beacon for women's rights, not the opposite. In this way, the feminist move- , ment and Islam have a lot in common. It really should have been Muslims that stood beside the Feminist Society at the forefront of the anti-Miss LSE campaign, and it is a Muslim's duty to fight against the oppression and the objectification of women, wherever it may occur. to imitate the classic show 'Man O Man'. We think the show was extremely well received, not only by the female contingent of the audience, but also by the males who were also in attendance, and from the feedback we have received we are confident that the next AU Exec will be copying the idea again". Let's not turn the whole issue into something it's not: Mr LSE was not a mockery of women, of feminism, or of men. And let's not be arrogant enough to think it's going to have wider, reverberating consequences for the oppression and inequality of women in our society. It was an evening of hilarity during which a roomflil of students got to laugh at eight men singing, dancing, and planking (generally making idiots of themselves) in the name of tongue-in-cheek joviality. My heartfelt thanks to all involved, especially Clare and her "pimped" crutches (yes, I am noting the androcentric irony of the word 'pimped'), Bocca for singing the personally sentimental 'Blaydon Races', and the AU executive for not taking themselves too seriously. 10 The Beaver | lo February 2009 Commeiit The Beaver Established in 1949 Issue No. 701 Telephone: 0207 955 6705 Email: editor(a)thebeaveronline.co.uk Questions for the director e hope he will not call anyone loss-making this time. The school's director, Howard Da-vies, will once again make himself available to answer questions and debate from students at this week's Union General Meeting on Thursday. It is fair to say that Davies' last performance was almost a complete disaster. The director managed to insult the majority of students by implying that they were a drain on the school's finances, and dismissed many students' questions far too curtly for this newspaper's liking. Members of the Athletic Union, for example, asked what the school would do to reschedule classes and lectures away from sports activities on Wednesday afternoons. They were treated to the bizarre spectacle of Davies, a former chair of the Financial Services Authority and grandee of the Tate galleries and the Booker prize, attempting to argue that afternoons begin at one o'clock rather than midday. Overall, it was a tragically wasted opportunity for students to question the head of their university directly - an opportunity that our peers at almost any other university in the country do not get, and which we are lucky to have. Davies eventually and grace-fixlly apologised for any offence that had been caused by his remark, in a Beaver comment piece. This time around in the UGM, the director should pay students the courtesy of giving much fuller answers to the questions that they ask. Compared to last term's hearing, where the nursery and the relative emptiness of the New Academic Building were discussed, some issues have been solved. However, as even a cursory look at this week's Beaver news pages shows, the director should present the school's view on new issues that have arisen. It would be well worth students asking, for instance, what the school can do with regards to the Student Loans Company's treatment of bursaries. Or how the school's governors can be made more diverse and reflective of the student body: a Court of Governors that is 99 per cent white is just not good enough. There are also wider issues of what the school can do to promote graduate recruitment as recession teeters on the brink of depression and university leavers find themselves in the worst jobs drought for twenty years. Then there are problems left over from last term. What will the school do to make Wednesday afternoons free for sports players? Davies seemed surprised by the depth of feehng on the issue at his last UGM appearance, and promised that the school's timetables office would look into the situation. What will happen now? On one issue in particular, however, the director must make the school's position much plainer than in the past. The Beaver reports this week allegations that Davies did not give a full account of the school's investment in arms companies. Campaigners from the Not for Profit movement that has just been set up on campus say LSE may still contribute money to arms companies through a tracker fund, and that there is nothing to prevent the money going to these firms during normal trading. The Beaver will leave the merits of the protesters' claims up to readers to decide, but on such a morally controversial issue we feel that it was important and in the interest of students that the allegations were published. In many ways this issue is now bound up with the legacy of last month's Old Theatre occupation, the organisers of which demanded divestment from firms which supplied arms to Israel in the Gaza war. It is a legacy which this newspaper largely regards as baleful and damaging to relations on campus. The director may, or may not, have something to say about that as well. But ethical investment is something that affects us all at LSE. The time is right for LSE to stake out its rightful position as a moral leader among universities in this country. There can be no real opposition to creating a truly ethical investment strategy in the school. The presumably small returns LSE may or may not get from investing in arms companies via the tracker fund are just not worth the moral ambiguity and opprobrium that LSE could attract on this issue. Students can therefore look forward to this week's meeting. If the director could discuss the finer points of the world's financial meltdovra at the recent Davos World Economic Forum, then surely he can give a straight answer to LSE students. Commeiit 11 The Beaver | lo February 2009 RBS's shameful involvement with oil and gas must be ended The banlc's unethical policies could offset any gains promised in climate change legislation Jade Buddenberg Banks have received much negative press lately. Sensational headlines exposed irresponsible lending and immorally high bonuses. Unethical investment policies, however, escaped the limelight. The Royal Bank of Scotland, one of the UK's largest banks - which also owns NatWest - is a prime example. Its corporate social responsibility team has worked hard to conceal that the bank is the UK's leading financier of climate change. Sneakily, its marketing has moved away from the old RBS image of'the oil and gas bank', and the bank's PR boasts 30 per cent reduction of in-house carbon emissions. Behind the scenes, however, RBS is funding environmental disaster without schiple. Even though taxpayers' money bought 60 per cent of its shares, the government encourages business as usual at RBS. RBS provides essential finance for two climatic^y outrageous projects: Kings-north Coal Power Station and Canadian tar sands. If built, the former will bust any hopes of the UK government reaching carbon targets set by its climate bill. The latter, if exploited fidly, will immorally accelerate climate change and turn an area as big as the UK into toxic wasteland. RBS is not the only financer of these two climate crimes. Yet it provided $10 billion for oil and gas projects in 2006 alone, more than any other UK bank. Canada sits on 15 per cent of total global oil locked into sand below pristine forest. The cost of extraction is nearly double that of conventional oil. Tapping this resource was unthinkable before peak oil and prices of $100 a barrel. Oil companies scrambled for this alternative source of fossil fiiel, literally scraping the bottom of the barrel. In 2004 and 2006 RBS arranged $800 million in loans to the Long Lake tar sands project in Canada, effectively investing in environmental disaster. Producing oil from tar sands involves deforestation, heating the sand and washing the tar out. This process emits three times more CO2 than conventional oil extraction. Along the way, an area larger than the UK could be deprived of forest. Boreal forest is special because it is one of the last ancient pristine forests in the world. Besides losing all its wildlife and a chunk of Canadian natural beauty, a valuable carbon sink is destroyed. Even worse, the soil acts as a carbon dioxide store, and so this greenhouse gas is released during extraction. Lastiy, the water used to wash the tar from the sand is left behind in lakes of toxic liquid, turning the area into a contaminated wasteland. In times of economic recession, oil and gas are considered safe investments. But in the long run, Canadian tar sands pose a risky venture in pure financial terms. The cost of expected law suits by affected locals and environmental groups is beyond estimation. Loops in the Canadian legal system are likely to close soon so that land wrill have to be restored to its former state. This will cost all stakeholders dearly. The recent drop in the oil price to half its value once again raises concern over the price tag of extraction. Finally, the reputation of all companies involved will suffer. Most importantly, burning the fossil fuel available in tar sands will counter any effort to combat climate change. Carbon emission targets will be unreachable if Canadian alternative fossil fuels are not fidly exploited. All environmental legisla- tion is undermined by such projects. The post-Kyoto talks taking place later this year in Copenhagen have thus suffered a set back before they even began. The credibility of the negotiating countries whose banks finance Canadian tar sands may rightly be questioned. On this side of the Atlantic, EON are planning to build the first new coal power plant in the UK for thirty years. The existing facilities at Kingsnorth in Kent are to be replaced by a coal firing station that is only 20 per cent cleaner. Instead of moving resources into sustainable sources of energy, the government is considering sanctioning this project. Coal is by far the dirtiest of fossil fUels because of the large carbon dioxide volumes released upon burning. If Kingsnorth is built, itw^l emit more carbon dioxide each year than the whole of Ghana, according to the World Development Movement. EON boast that 'carbon capture and storage' (CCS) technology will remedy this effect. However, this technology is far from ready to use commercially. At the same time it would increase the plant's energy needs by at least a quarter. The method of storing carbon dioxide under the earth is hardly a solution, reminiscent of nuclear waste contaminating the earth for decades. Deserving more ridicule, Kingsnorth is at most 'CCS ready' and there are no guarantees the technology will ever be used. Caroline Lucas MEP reported that Kingsnorth being 'CCS ready' means "there is a big space much like a car park next to the proposed coal fire station" -nothing more. All of EON's greenwash should not distract from the detrimental consequences Kingsnorth would have. Not only will it undermine the UK government's Climate Bill targets. It will embarrass this country as hypocrites at international climate negotiations. How is it, China will surely ask, that we should not rely on coal for power while you are investing in it yourself? RBS was the mandated lead arranger of $70 billion of loans to EON in 2007 along with Barclays and HSBC. The proximity of this deal to the announcement of' Kingsnorth suggests that RBS loans will partially finance the coal plant. Sadly, this is only the tip of the melting iceberg for RBS. The bank has provided coal financing loans-totaling $95 billion in the short time span of 2006 to 2008. Admittedly, RBS has financed some renewable energy projects, including wind farms in Italy and Australia. But these investments remain laughable compared to the bank's involvement in coal. Scaled against total investments in oil and gas, RBS's contribution to renewable energy is virtually invisible. he RBS building in London iPhoto: fliclo- use* Dmmaboy RBS, or the 'Oyal Bank of Scotland', is literally fuelling climate chaos. Even two years ago, its embedded carbon footprint was estimated to be larger than that of Scotland, chiefly due to its involvement in Canadian tar sands. The bank's CSR division is keen to point out its efforts to reduce internal carbon emissions. However, RBS refuse to even monitor indirect emissions which have risen fivefold from 2001-2006. RBS claim they invest on behalf of clients and rebuff any responsibility for their investments. S3'ndicated loans have made it difficult to blame one bank alone for financing a project. Pressure groups and environmentalists are calling for more transparency. Especially after the bailout, the UK taxpayer has a right to more accountability. Yet the government insists at keeping RBS at an arm's length. The pressure is building, along with calls for a more regulated banking system. Campaigners are fighting for more ethical investment policies. People and Planet, a UK-wide student group, are threatening to boycott RBS-NatWest in autumn next year. Their impact remains to be seen, but the government is in a unique position to set a standard in accordance with its ambitious climate bill. RBS, in the meantime, is likely to increase investment into their CSR division. A queer kind of progress Legal recognition of trans identity is needed li .1 Lizzie Meirrow ISESULGBT Officer J'ust over a month ago, the Pope declared that gays pose the same threat to life on this planet as global warming. The pontiff's address brought to a close a year which saw a cacophonous and international uebate surrounding the confrontation between religious and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgendered (LGBT) rights groups. In November, Proposition 8 passed in California to amend the state's constitution to define marriage as an exclusively heterosexual union. Groups supporting Prop 8, in particular the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, claimed that the legalisation of gay marriage threat- ,V; The controversy over the appointment of openly gay Gene Robinson as bishop shows there is still isome way to go to reconcile religion and sexuality IPhoto: flickr user L/uiceus ened their religious freedom, and pumped millions of dollars into the campaign for the measure. These events may lead some to worry about mounting tension in the supposed contradictions between religious values and LGBT rights. What is often overlooked is the degree of support the gay community received from certain religious minorities in the run-up to the elections. A number of Jewish groups voiced their opposition to Prop 8, as did the Episcopal Church in California. Following the election, Jon Meacham, an author and commentator on issues of faith in America who is a practicing Episcopalian, claimed that there was "a very compelling religious case to be made for gay marriage. It is not the job of religious . people to deny sacraments." Dan Savage, gay rights activist and advice columnist, pointed out that there are congregations in America "that will marry gay and lesbian couples. What about their religious freedom?" Footage from every major American city on 15 November showed hundreds of thousands of people demonstrating against Proposition 8. The amendment overturned the ruling of the state's Supreme Court that denial of equal protection under the law on the grounds of sexual orientation is unconstitutional. This, and the fact that the straight majority was allowed to vote on the rights of the minority, led many straight 'allies' -supporters of the LGBT movement - to take to the streetis alongside those more directly affected. The events after Prop 8, and the fact that the amendment passed by a mere 4 per cent of the vote - as opposed to 20 • per cent, which was the winning margin of a similar measure in 2004 - should be viewed as a source of encouragement. Not only is society progressing towards a more open and accepting attitude towards gay rights, religious groups are participating in the struggle. In last week's partB, Neeraj Patel outlined the concept of'trans' and the range of identities which it encompasses. Trans people will often reject the gender assigned to them at birth (at birth. assigned gender is based on exterior anatomy), on the grounds that their self-identified gender doesn't match up with their assigned gender. Some identify with the opposite gender (male or female), some don't feel comfortable defining themselves within the male-female-binary at all, and some identify as both. These identities and issues fall within the umbrella term 'trans', and belong to what is probably the least recognised minority in the UK. Patel drew attention to the fact that the LSE's anti-harassment policy neglects to mention discrimination on the grounds of gender identity. In fact, the School fulfils this country's legal standards by excluding trans people from protection: there is no hate crime legislation pertaining to gender identity. This stems frorfi the fact that there are only two recognised gender identities in UK law: male and female. In effect, the gender binary of male and female is enforced by law. This creates a whole range of unnecessary problems for trans people, and should possibly be considered to be governmental coercion in its worst form, reaching beyond mere regulation of the individual's home or right to privacy, attempting to restrict their very identity. Proposition 8 and measures like it pose a threat not only to the rights of gay and bisexual people, but also to straight people's rights, because it grants the state the authority to decide which type of partner is acceptable in which type of legally recognised union. UK law poses a threat to trans and,non-trans people alike because it dictates who a person can or can't be. However, it is important to recognize and appreciate the progress which has been made: where division and prejudice were formerly the rule, LGB rights groups have become increasingly aware of the 'T' that was only recentiy added to their acronym. Education on trans identity has made significant progress. With continued unity within and pressure from the LGBT and ally community, UK legislation will evolve to accommodate for trans people, their protection and recognition under the law. 12 The Beaver 1 lo February 2009 Comment Letters to the editor Email: editor@thebeaveroiiline.co.uk Fax: 0207852 3733 Letters must be received by midnight on the Sunday prior to publication. They must state your fidl name and be no longer than 250 words. Letters may be edited. More abortion debate on campus Dear Sir, Whatever happened to debate at the LSE? Firstly, on picking up a copy of The Beaver (700th edition, no less) this week I was disappointed by the highly tendentious content. I read three articles which approached the sensitive and difficult subject of abortion. It is a grave subject upon which good people disagree. There appeared, however, to be no room for disagreement with the prevailing pro-choice orthodoxy amongst The Beaver Editorial team given that there was not a shred of balance in the 3 reporting or comment pieces, and nobody commissioned to give an alternative viewpoint. I hope this apparent disparity viall be disolved with an article putting the other side of the argument in next week's edition. Secondly, Mr. Akpan-Inwang appears incandescent at the audacity of a group who believe the unborn child is a worthy cause to champion and advocate their case should wish to share their views with LSE Students. Surely a man with such a temperament is iU-suited to the position of Education and Welfare Officer, let alone the LSE: a veritable hotbed of debate rerum cognoscere causas [italics]. Finally, after some time trying to locate the Letters "section" in The Beaver, I came across a meagre two letters buried in a single column slither. When I contributed to the column inches of the newspaper, the Letters section was the scene of robust exchange, alas no longer. I would like to be proved wrrong by the publication of this letter and steps taken to redress concerns expressed herewith. Yours faithfiilly, Samuel Burke BSc'08 Parallels with the Conservative past Dear Sir, So the Conservative Future leader says his party wiU only oppose "far-left fascism". Maybe his party still prefer to make friends with fascists of the far-right, just like Maggie Thatcher did with General Pinochet? GaiyBuswell BSc '09 Not as grim as you think up north Dear Sir, I was shocked to read an article in this week's Beaver entitled "students, academic debate grimness of the North". The wording of the title alone aggrieved me. This constant negative connotation that the North holds as being grim, poor and unhappy is something that must be changed. On a monetary scale, the North may be of slightly less value than the South, but Sir, I ask you now, can you put a price on happiness and joy? Living in the North gives me such pleasure, the friendliness of the people is unrivalled and the landscape is varied and stunning. I only hope that not all LSE students hold views similar to those of Tim Leunig. Indeed, I willingly invite any confused southerners to spend a weekend at my home in Yorkshire to experience the area I so love. There's nowt wrong wi the north! / Yours sincerely. Joshua E T Wood BSc'11 Blackpool tower, beach and pier in northern England Photo; flickr user Neihoi Short-selling must not be left unchecked Greater regulation of this speculative comer of the finacial sector will help confidnce it'il s'J g'U »•!? n-v, " Matt Lomas Short-sellers. They've been blamed for financial ruin since 1929; but who are they, and what do they do? Put simply, they borrow (or in some cases don't even bother to do this - so-called 'naked short-selling') shares from a company and sell them in the hope the prices will fall. The aim is to buy them back at a lower price in order to return the stock to the original owner - pocketing the difference as profit. They usually work as part of hedge fimd management. Consider this statement from former Dr Mahathir Mohammad, expressing views typical of many Third World leaders when it comes to short-selling: "Stop hedge funds, derivatives and currency ^11 trading. Stop banks lending non-existent money by the billions. Regulate and supervise your banks. Jail miscreants who made profits from abusing the system." This statement was sent in an open letter from the former leader of Malaysia for twenty three years to Barack Obama upon his assuming the presidency. Mahathir has also blamed George Soros, the famous Hungarian-bom stock market speculator in the past for his country's currency collapse in 1997. He has some other strange ideas, but nevertheless his viewpoint carries great currency in the Third World. In the current crisis, short-selling has been blamed for high-profile casualties. Alex Salmond, the First Minister of Scotland, blamed "spins?and speculators", in reference to short sellers, for HBOS's plummeting share price, which fluctuated between 88p and 22op on 17 September 2008, before a take-over deal by Lloyds TSB was announced later the same day. There are reports that traders had short- sold HBOS share stocks and then spread rumors through anonjonous e-mails about its poor flinding position. One trader is said to have made £100 million. Vince Cable, the Liberal Democrat Treasury spokesman, called hedge fund managers who partake in short-selling as the "masters of the universe." The Financial Services Authority soon after launched an investigation and banned all short-selling on 19 September. But this ban was not renewed last month after a review, but the FSA instead demanded that short-sellers disclose their position to the market. Most analysts say that short-sellers are not to blame for the current financial crisis. Before the crisis there had been a boom in short-selling, particularly in Asian markets in which, ironically, anti-short-selling feeling has traditionally been high over the last decade, due to the currency crisis there in 1997. The FSA has refiised to extend the ban amid an admission that the initial ban may have harmed the market by dampening any chances of liquidity entering back into the system. At the same time, Germany, Belgium and France have extended their bans until March. The FSA has also declined to impose further restrictions on short-selling. It has refused to introduce a 'circi^it-breaker', whereby trades of shares are suspended if their price falls by more than 10 per cent, as well as to adopt a 'tick-up-rule', where shares can be traded only if their price is rising. There is an expectation that the FSA may adopt similar practices to the US, where all brokers are required to marka sale as a long or short one. This would allow for more data on the market and therefore more transparency; having the desired effect of investors being able to determine whether a sale is artificial or not. Why is the UK so in love with short-selling then? Short-selling is an extreme of the free market, a powerfld tool in 'cleaning up the market'. During the 1997 Short-sellers rely on falling share prices to make profits Photo: flickr user saibotreseel Asian crisis many analysts and World Bank officials lamented these countries' poor economic fundamentals such as current account deficits. Yet Hong Kong had an excellent current account situation in 1997, and solid foreign reserves worth US$88 billion. Why then did its currency stumble in 1997? Eventually, Hong Kong was able to avoid devaluation, but it still saw a severe fall in its stock market value when its economy was on a relatively fine footing. Incidentally, Donald Tsang, the then Financial Secretary, declared war on the speculators. But the fact remains that short-selling is big business. It seems it would be silly to put a total ban on short-selling - it is an effective tool of the market to expose inefficient market positions, such as a current account deficit. Yet the practice itself must not go unchecked. We need more transparency, and a declaration by brokers of whether a sale is long or short is a good start - but only that. The Beaver | lo February 2009 ' r--, m The London School of Exclusion Joe Sammut and Aliabbas Viirani discuss the elitism behind British university admissions Perhaps the acronjnn LSE should stand for "London School of Exclusion". An investigation in last Monday's Guardian confirms that Britain's top universities are the reserve of the "well-off niiddle class". The research found that children from the most affluent quarter of families account for 55 per cent of students at "prestigious universities". This was described as evidence of a "ticking time bomb" as a lack of equal opportunities for education often deepens social problems. Amongst the "prestigious" universities used in the research were Bristol and Warwick, which are merely members of the elite Russell group. This is unlike the LSE, which is part of the unofficially termed, super-elite "Gg group" of British universities. This long standing trend of elitism is set to be amplified by the fierce lobbying of the G5 group of universities. The G5, coined by the 'Times Higher Education Supplement, is named after the G7, the largest capitalist economies. 'They represent a group of universities that regard themselves as the best and most prestigious in the country. Richard Sykes, Rector of Imperial College London (a fellow G5 university) till July last year, threatened to reject home and EU students unless the £3000 cap on tuition fees was lifted. The resonance of this threat can be felt within the LSE itself, with its 60 per cent of international students who pay enormous sums to acquire a degree with the LSE brand name. More recently, the Chancellor of Oxford University, Lord Patten, stated his belief that universities should "not be treated like social security offices" and that the cap on tuition fees should not exist at all. In other words, he believed universities that have high levels of research funding and are weU-reputed should charge fees comparable to that charged in American universities. Howard Davies' views on the loss-making nature of home fee-paying students are not unknown. His recent comments that people are going to have to experience a drop in living standards to "releverage" the economy shows that perhaps, he believes that EU and home students should be charged fees comparable to what is imposed on international students. Anna Krausova, a second-year Government undergraduate, said she believes that "the bureaucrats in the school administration are looking to rip off UK and EU students as much as international students". This disparity between EU students and international students is unpopular with some sectors of the LSE student body. An international student, who wished to remain anonymous, argued that "this is a disgusting example of the UK's climate of hostility to foreigners. People are judged not on their intellect but on whether they can pay the fees; it sometimes feels that you're bujnngyour way into a white man's club instead of being welcomed due to your contribution to an academic institution." If this fee change is to be implemented, it will only come into effect after a review next year. In a shining example of the beacon that is British democracy, the Labour government made an agreement to postpone the findings of the review until after the next general election. It would not be ridiculous to claim that this shows an expectation of an unfavourable and predetermined result, instead of a decision only being made after all information is considered. Part of the problem for UK universities is the high level of bureaucracy and centralised control over funding. An illustration of this is the Research Assessment Exercise (RAE), a committee that decides how fimding is allocated based upon a faculty's level and "quality" of published research. The RAE assesses the productivity of a faculty and, through the absurd logic of Thatcherism, the best performing departments are given more funding. 'The government programme '"The Future of Higher Education" even admits that this will see funding being concentrated in the hands of a small minority of universities, while the rest will face budget cuts. Centralisation of research fiinding is not the only problem with the RAE. As is fiilly consistent with Labour's policy in other areas, it focuses attention on providing research and the "relevant skills" for employability in today's economy. In practice, this means that education is becoming increasingly modular and narrowly focused on acquiring particular skills that are useful for employers. In a speech last Thursday, Tony Benn argued that education should be focused on "discovering the genius in everybody" and should be a "lifelong process" rather than a just precursor to employment. The aim of creating critical, educated people - vital for the survival of a democratic society - seems unimportant in comparison to providing functionaries for industries. This is the essence of the university model that is being implemented in the UK, even though only a minority of universities (such as the LSE) concentrate on research. The majority of universities will become mere training institutions for emplo3anent. The government paper that outlines their programme states that "realising the economic benefits of university research" is a central aspect of policy. "This policy encourages the funding of faculties that have directly transferable research for business but at the detriment of facilities without such skills. This affects humanities and social science faculties in particular. At the LSE, a department which is under direct threat is the department of Social Anthropology. Conversely, departments such as the Economics department will continue to shift from any critical discussion on the subject towards skills required for financial institutions. ¦This process of shifting priorities are already felt in other universities such as , Sussex University, a reasonably prestigious institution, where the campaign "Sussex: Not For Sale" was formed. This was an organisation of students, teachers and lecturers who aimed to combat the perceived threat of the business driven approach to other departments. At the heart of the campaign is the recent and massive expansion of the Business School "It sometimes feels like you're buyingyour way into a white man's club instead of being welcomed due to your contribution" in Sussex, which trains students in skills transferable to business, as a sign of the university's move away from critical and holistic education. It can be posited that this move is in effect subsidising the costly aspects of business, such as training, and thus increasing the profit level at the expense of the fee pa3fing student and taxpayer. The latest economic recession is set to intensify this business-driven policy. The Education Department recently cut the teaching grant at the London Metropolitan University by 10 per cent. A University and College Lecturers Union (UCU) representative from the university said that "there was nothing left to cut" and that the cut was having a damaging effect on education quality. According to him, teachers "teach ridiculous hours so cannot teach the way [they] would like". The London Met faces 400 redundancies and the UCU representative argued that is is likely to enter a "spiral of decline". That is, uiJess it becomes a "private institution" that would entail the complete closure of the Met as an academic institution and turning it into a training institute for business. In his speech on Thursday, Tony Benn argued "if you can bail out the bloody banks you can bail out the education system". This argument can be developed into a solution for education in the country. Contrary to claims of feasibility, the UK managed to maintain a world-class higher education system that was free at the point of access; this is maintained in most European countries as well as some less economically-developed countries. If the aim of higher education is to educate people critically and holistically, then this programme is a surely solution. The alternative is a series of training institutions that can add value to labour for business, but nothing mor^, at the taxpayers and fee payer's expense. Fortunately, the renaissance of student activism on campus and across the country makes the former solution realisable. 14 The Beaver,I lo February 2009 Featuires n Photos: Steve Millei- Stop banking on 'racism' spin Campbell McDade criticises the Government's flawed and c3mical accusations of xenophobia As the strikes and protests at the Lindsey oil refinery came-to an end on Thursday, Gordon Brown is surely ruing his choice of words 18 months ago when he promised "British jobs for every British worker". The sentiment behind these words was perhaps noble, but wholly inconsisent with his ardent support for firee trade and open markets at the World Economic Forum in Davos last week; urging countries to avoid retreating into protectionism. His is right in the latter (and most probably taken out of context in the former), but with a recession firmly entrenched and a looming depression, courses of action and word choices wiU be looked at with an eye towards criticism. Contradictions present in Brown's speech are one thing, but this is quite different from his senior ministers' claims that the strike actions last week were xenophobic. These are not jingoistic nationalists, they are workers who, like many of us, are worried about the prospects of work in this harsh economic climate. The government is not alone in this. The BBC was forced to apologise for the misrepresentation of a worker on strike, who was shown on Monday's news saying, "These Portuguese and Eyeties - we can't work alongside them". Apparently, he had gone on to say that the British workers could not work alongside the foreign workers because they were being segregated by the hiring firm, rather than because they were impossible to abide by. Using the term "Eyeties" to replace Italians was wrong and should rightfiilly be condemned, but it is clear that the news editors were using this statement as an opportunity to skew the public perception of the workers, in line with what many politicians and other newspaper commentators have been sa3ang. Leaving the inaccurate portrayal of the oil workers aside, the dangers of xenophobia and fervent nationalism still persist. In the very same news broadcast, the BBC showed an incident in which a member of the British National Party was trying to hand out leaflets to the strikers. In the spirit of accurate and fair reporting, they subsequently showed a worker asking for the BNP member to be removed, but the incident is still a worrying reminder of the potential political backlash in times like ours. Last week's Beaver reported that Michael Rock, the national chair of Conservative Future, was unwilling to join the LSE in supporting an anti-BNP drive, which highlights that such .complacency is not uncommon. Aled Fisher was absolutely right in attacking Rock for his preference of'bogus theoretical debates'. The BNP is dangerous; they preach extremist rhetoric and it is childish and ignorant of anyone with any sense of historical knowledge to not to join in wholeheart-; edly condemning them. j A leaked Home Office report last I September, entitled'Responding to Economic Challenges', made, was proof that the government is worried about the economic downturn leading to increased support for extreme groups, political or otherwise. The anti-fascist magazine "Searchlight" reported in the same month that the BNP expected to gain from the recession, quoting the BNP treasurer saying, "Economic meltdowns are one of the drivers of political revolutions, and the BNP must be ready to take advantage of the mess all the of the other parties have made of the economy." It is not hard to see why the Home Office and the BNP believe this. The period after World War I is increasingly being compared to the current crisis (though somewhat prematurely). The post war period was also the era of political extremism in Europe, often with racist and If the Prime Minister and the Business Secretary are worried about xenophobia, a more useful start would perhaps be making sure there is social protection in place nationalist undertones. However, staying aware of this danger is markedly different from painting the workers at Lindsey as xenophobes. Such rhetoric is inflammatory and if anything, likely to drive workers into the arms of the BNP and other groups who should be excluded as much as possible from the political process. Some of the members of the strike might be BNP members, and some might even be thinking of voting for or supporting the BNP, but generalist comments such as Lord Mandelson's that we should concentrate on economic issues and not the "politics of xenophobia" is hardly helpfiil. Society at large has a responsibility to ensure that members of the BNP, or any other extremist, group are isolated and unable to preach their ignorance to others. The governing party should not belittle the economic plight of citizens, but should make sure that there are social safety nets to protect those who have been dealt a bad hand by the free market and globalisatiqn. The workers at Lindsey are not blaming the foreigners who are 'stealing their jobs' for their grievances. Rather, they are upset that the winners of the Total contract are using European Union laws to ignore local pay deals and employing people, regardless of nationality, below hard fought union pay deals. This is not the fault of Total nor Ae company, IREM, who won the contract. It is an that the government in this country should assess, as they are the ones entrusted to make sure the electorate and taxpayers are properly considered. If the issue is essentially concerned with minimum wage being incompatible with local union pay, then perhaps that matter needs to be carefiiUy reviewed. Shirking responsibility by condemning the aggrieved is not constructive. Gordon Brown was correct in extolling the virtues of the firee market at Davos, especially in the face of calls across the pond for protectionism. The USA and Britain have spent the last 30 years preaching to the rest of the world about the importance of free flow of capital and goods. For them to about turn when things start to get rough is hypocritical, and not the correct course of action. However, the free market does not have to be inconsistent with rightful justice. If IREM had the best proposal, they should be awarded the contract by aU means. But when they are employing foreign workers because the British minimum wage allows them to ignore local pay deals, then there are clearly problems. If the Prime Minister and the Business Secretary are worried about xenophobia, a more usefld start would perhaps be making sure there is social protection in place, rather than bandying the term about in an attempt to denigrate and deliberately misrepresent the angst on the picket lines. We must ensure the EU and common market is maintained (not least because British workers are employed on the continent far more than other Europeans are employed in Britain) while at the same time maldng sure there is protection for British workers and that xenophobia is treated seriously and not as a smear to decty genuine recourse. The dangers of parties of the far right (or far left, for that matter) should be taken seriously and not be used as a political or theoretical tool. If the BNP wins in the upcoming European elections then the fault will lie with the government as much as with those tricked by their seemingly converted public face. We should be working with those in Brussels to see that free market does not mean companies can exploit pay differences. Encouraging a situation where Nick Griffin represents British constituents at the European Par- , liament is not likely to help that. Features 15 The Beaver i 10 February 2009 > It's the economy, Gordon EsteUe Cooch wants political action and worker solidarity to fight recession and the far right It is not the first time that the slogan 'British Jobs for British Workers' has been chanted by workers on picket lines fearing for their jobs. Sadly, it will probably not be the last. The slogan was first encouraged by Oswald Mosley-Leader of the British Union of Fascists in the 1930s, to justify attacks on Jewish immigrants to the East End of London. It emerged again during the 1970s in an attempt to force black and Asian workers out of their jobs. Since then it has re-emerged time and time again, whenever dissatisfied workers reach the • wrong conclusion of the causes of unemployment, with foreign workers being, scapegoated as a result. The most recent unofficial strikes that have swept Britain's oil refineries and power stations involved over 2,000 workers. In the Sellafield Nuclear Plant in Cumbria, there was a meeting of over 600 workers in the car park to discuss strike action. The initial waLk-outs at Lindsey Refinery in North Lincolnshire came after protests at the arrival of 200 Italian and Portuguese staff, who were awarded a large construction contract in favour of British workers. This has since sparked "sympathy strikes" and unofficial walkouts at twenty-one other plants across Britain. When one considers the impotence of British trade unionism since the 1980s, these numbers are without doubt remarkable. Many media commentators, trade union leaders and politicians have portrayed the walk-outs as an example of solidarity between British workers - the like of which we have not seen in years. Derek Simpson, joint leader of the largest Trade Union in Britain claimed 'The unofficial action taking place across the UK is not about race or immigration, it's about class.' I wish I could agree with Derek Simpson, but one only has to consider the elated reaction of the British National Party, the United Kingdom Independence Party 1(UKIP) and others to realise that, sadly, the defining element behind most ,of the strikes is immigration. The BNP claimed on their website last week that it was proud to be "the only party which unequivocally stands for the rights of British workers" and this was "a great day for British nationalism". Likewise, UKIP chose to capitalise on the strikes by claiming 'It's not British jobs for British workers, it's British taxes for foreign workers'. The fact that immigrants Contribute 10 per cent more to the economy in tax and national insurance compared to what they receive in benefits and services seems to be irrelevant to UKIP. Similarly, three times as many British workers leave the UK to work in the European Union, compared with the number of EU workers entering Britain - another fact conveniently glossed over by those wishing to capitalise on anti-immigrant feeling. It is worth remembering at this point that it was Gordon Brown who first pledged 'British jobs for British workers' in June 2007. Indeed, in recent years we have seen all major British political parties slowly shift more and more to the right in an attempt to outdo each other at the severity of Aeir stance on immigration. As we plunge headlong into the worst recession, at least since the 1970s, the negative effects of the anti-immigration rhetoric espoused by New Labour and Conservative ministers is going to become frighteningly apparent. The debate over British involvement within the EU and the problems that the 'free-market' has created for British workers is at the heart of the recent strikes. Again, this considers the issue from the vvrrong angle. The problem with Britain and the EU is not one of nationality, but rather the imposition of neo-liberal regulations on EU countries that have reduced the rights of all workers to the benefit of employers. Whenever the opportunity to sign British workers up to positive EU Itis only by attacking the ^stemof subcontracting itself that we can seriously fight exploitation in all sectors of the British worldbrce regulations that cap working hours or improve working conations has arisen. New Labour ministers have rejected it. Instead, over the past twenty years we have seen the gradual privatisation of basic welfare services and an increase in the subcontraction of jobs. Subcontracting firms - those that carry out a particular part of a project in an attempt to reduce costs - are usually huge multinationals who take workers on as self-employed, in an effort to produce a multi-layered economy. In effect, as the number of supposedly 'self-employed' workers increases, so does the opportunity to decrease wages and working conditions and abandon any responsibility towards holiday leave, sick leave and pension rights. To blame foreign workers for accepting jobs in subcontractor firms is to miss the point completely; they face worse rates of exploitation than most unionised British workers. It is only by attacking the system of subcontracting itself, engaging with the foreign workers involved, unionising them and building solidarity that we can seriously fight exploitation in all sectors of the British workforce. Had the strikes been about subcontiacting, job cuts or factory closures, it is likely that Gordon Brown would have been forced to act quickly, yet the divisive nature of the 'British jobs for British workers' slogan let the real oUprits - subcontracting multinationals - off the hook, allowing for the continued exploitation of those workers. While Gordon Brown was quick to distance himself from the slogan (although advocating it only two years previously), unless we see a real shift in government rhetoric around immigration and asylum, the underlying racism in the recent strikes will no doubt re-emerge as the recession gets worse. One cannot claim that 'immigrants should adopt British norms of acceptability' and at the same time wonder why votes for the BNP have increased four-fold since 2001. While media stories and government rhetoric may not always . appear 'explicitiy' racist, they contribute to a tone around immigration discourse that suggests immigrants and asylum seekers are a problem that needs to be tackled, rather than focusing on government policy that has shifted jobs away firom the manufacturing industry and destioyed basic welfare services. Since the Thatcher government, the move away from manufacturing jobs has been justified by the explanation that Britain was becoming a global financial centre. As another bank seems to collapse every day, one must begin to question the logic of a system where the long-term goal remains profit, rather than the welfare of ordinary people. There is no reason for ordinary people to be unemployed in this country. 'The collapse of the banks proves the government will intervene to save jobs when it is in their interests to do so. As global warming and the destruction of our environment continues to worsen, why can the government not invest money into creating jobs building renewable energy resources? The recession is not going to go away any time soon, the living conditions of working people are going to get worse alongside increased job cuts and if the wrong conclusions are drawn about the crisis, the popularity of racist parties like the BNP will continue to grow. Britain has a proud multiracial history and likewise one of fighting the lies peddled by fascist parties. Thfe solution is not to blame British workers, nor is it to blame foreign workers, but rather to blame those at the top of the global financial system who have caused this crisis. It is unlikely that they will be feeling the strain of the recession anytime soon. Only collective resistance and solidarity between all workers, regardless of nationality, can begin to challenge the system that brought us into this mess. i6 ¦ The Beaver | lo February 2009 Features SRI LANKA STOP THE BOMBING OF INNOCENT TAMILS Flickr user steve punter The price of peace Devika Menon wonders if an end is trufy within sight for the war-weaiy Sri Lankans Three long decades of incessant fighting, and the civil war in Sri Lanka finally seems to be on its last legs - or so they say. Never before has the Sri Lankan army been so close to victory, having captured three rebel strongholds in the Northeast since January. It has been a good couple of months in terms of propaganda for President Mahinda Rajapaksa, who came to office in 2005 after his promise to end the war once and for all. On a superficial level, he seems to be keeping this pledge, but does the end of the war really guarantee a decisive and complete end to a 30 year-old conflict? And does the promise of an 'imminent victory' justify the alleged human rights abuses diat have the international community in a frenzy? It is perhaps apt to consider the background behind this seemingly endless and complicated conflict. The civil war between the Liberation Tigers of the Tamil Eelam (LITE), or simply the 'Tamil Tigers', and the mostly Sinhalese government began in the late 1970s when various forms of discrimination towards Tamils escalated. The LTTE demanded a separate Tamil state, and to this day claim they will not rest until they receive a 'guarantee of living with freedom and dignity and sovereignty'. A bitter war ensued between the army and the Tigers, unperturbed by sporadic international efforts at ceasefires and peace talks. The inauguration of Rajapaksa in 2005 saw the end of the 2002 peace talks, and fighting resumed in the Tamil heartlands north of the country -where most of the war has been concentrated. The government's unwillingness to accept nothing less than an unconditional surrender and the complete destruction of the LTTE, coupled with the Tigers' resilience and their refusal to settle for anything but fireedom and sovereignty, has brought the situation to a dead end. Is "victory" really wdthin reach, as the government believes? Or will the rebels bounce back from this all-time low, as they have done so many times before? Very little has been said from the side of the Tamil Tigers after their recent losses, but their spokesman seemed, at least on the surface, unfazed, and did not believe that this is the end of the road for their hard-fought cost. The issue has persisted for too long and is rooted too deep into Sri Lankan society to be resolved with a military victory. It may, hopefiUly, be a significant stepping stone towards an eventual solution - but only if followed by adequate and carefiil diplomacy. A sec-ond-year Sinhalese student believes that a government victory can solve the conflict, but said "the government wdU have to keep a watchfid eye to prevent LTTE rearming themselves. During the ceasefire in 2004, this is exactly what happened." Caught between the rebel group and the determined government are 250,000 innocent civilians, who have no chance of escaping the Northeast where the army is "there is an underi3ring feeling that this will not be the end of the conflict" now battling for control of shrinking Tiger territory. Both sides show a shocking indifference towards the plight of these people, with neither willing to hazard a short ceasefire period to allow evacuation of the region. The government's rationale is that the rebels wrill (as they have certainly done before) use the ceasefire period to regroup and plan further attacks, which they cannot afford at this stage. They also claim that civilians cannot expect protection outside government-established safe zones. On the rebel side, claims that civilians are being used as human shields and are thus prevented from escaping have not been clarified; independent journalists are not allowed near the war zones. However, the thousands trapped between the two sides are undoubtedly and desperately trying to escape, with a group of 2500 having done so in the past few days. International humanitarian organisations are expressing increasing concerns about the trapped civilians, who, among other things, are now experiencing food crises. The UN World Food Programme has not been able to get supplies across to the war-hit areas for nearly a month. Convoys sent out to investigate the situation have left, claiming their investigations were interrupted and inhibited and ultimately, ineffective. It seems that the international community is doing all that it can at the moment without further aggravating the situation. Increasing pressure for peace talks in order for the innocents to be evacuated and receiving a guarantee from the government that non-combatants will be unharmed are the safest actions that can be taken, given the political tensions and complications. The government is already accusing certain organisations of exaggerating numbers and favouring the Tigers. The end of the war may be near, with rebel-held territory shrinking fast (they now hold just 200 square kilometres), but the fiiture of the people and the country as a whole still looks ha2y. In the capital Colombo, while some are excited over the. prospect of victory, a source living in city, who does not want to be named, says that "there is the underlying feeling that this will not be the end of the conflict". Mistrust among Tamils may still fester, leading to the formation of new groups, and worse still there is the fear that the LTTE wiU not go down without an attack on the capital. Colombo is fiercely guarded by the army but it may be a last ditch attempt by the rebels, when they have absolutely nothing left to lose. Indeed, the end of this war maybe the beginning of a new Cold War-esque situation within the country. If the army does prevail in the next few days as is prophesied, it wnU be a significant victory for President Rajapaksa, who would go dowm in history as the figure who ended a war that many believed could not be won. But at what cost? Features Contact The Beaver Features features@thebeaveronline.co.uk 0207 955 6705 17 The Beaver 110 February 2009 t From Right to Left: the political columns Hayek i Auntie Beeb doesn't know best Alex Blance Laski Once again the BBC appears to have got itself into a right mess. After the enormous row over the behaviour of Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand, they're back at the task of creatiiig their own chaos. This time it has been with Carol Thatcher, daughter of the former Prime Minister Baroness Thatcher. It is reported that, within the privacy of the green room [ after filming an episode of The One Show, I on which Thatcher served as a roaming i reporter, she described a tennis player they had been watching on television as a "golliwog". After a period of back and forth between the BBC people, who leaked the comment to the press, and Thatcher's agent, a fiUl apology came from Carol for any unintended offence caused by her thoughtless remark. Her agent toured around television and radio stations saying: "Carol is mortified that anyone should take offence at a silly joke. She has summarily apologised." However this was not enough to satisfy the Beeb and they later confirmed that Thatcher had been sacked from her job at the show for not apologising for her comments sooner. Vlad Unkovski-Korica The state that the BBC has got itself into with these kind of incidents has got to a ridiculous point, but the way that Carol Thatcher has been treated is particularly terrible, considering a number of other 'incidents' that the corporation has dealt with along these hnes. Thinking back to the Ross/Brand row. The comments they left on an individual's answer phone were directly rude, insulting and disrespectfld to him and his family, yet it is noticeable that Ross got away writh a short period of suspension and is now back and bold as ever. The difference between Ross and Thatcher is that his remarks were directly harmfiil and anyone could see they were so, and there was plenty of time for him to stop and reconsider his actions, which he clearly failed to do. While it is not in any way acceptable to refer to people as looking like golliwogs, and I entirely agree with London mayor Boris Johnson's view that the journalist's use was offensive, we are children of an enlightened age. Given the time that Thatcher grew up, when 'Golly' still appeared on Robinson's jam and golliwogs were still very much around in popular culture, one can at least comprehend how someone could make such an unpleasant slip up. Carol did this, but apologised for the remark and has no history of making other offensive comments. V^ile this does not entirely absolve her of aU guilt in her bad choice of words, it should be taken as an apology. This is in contrast to Radio i DJ Chris Moyles and the BBC's hypocrisy in its handling of his behaviour. He has been surrounded by controversies regarding sexism, a number of homophobic remarks and comments in poor taste about Auschwitz. However, the BBC has come to Moyles' defence each time. If the BBC is going to take the unforgiving line that it has taken with Carol Thatcher we must demand at the very least that a level of consistency in its treatment of other staff. Yet I believe that the corporation is heading down a very slippery road, and I fear that if they applied the Thatcher standard on regret-fiil comments across the board, the BBC would see a culling of presenters. We must stamp out racist, homophobic, and other offensive uses of language, but doing so by generating these unpleasant rows does not seem the best way to do it. Time is ripe to fight the far right F ¦¦La S [ascism is a clear and present danger across the world today. Fascists everywhere are looking to benefit from the economic cri--sis and the ideological confusion it has sowed in communities threatened by mass unemployment, poverty and uncertainty. Witness the elation with which the British National Party welcomed the mass wrildcat strikes at oil refineries and power plants last week. A common slogan displayed by strikers demanded 'British jobs for British workers'. The BNP applauded the action and called on workers to join its trade union, caUed Solidarity. The BNP is no longer a marginal force in British politics. Having won a seat in the London Assembly last May, it hopes to win a London seat in the European Parliament in spring of this year. Richard Bambook won the London Assembly seat for the far right group, after a campaign in which he said that "parts of our capital city are coming to resemble a dangerous and grotty third-world town". What kind of person will they put forward as a candidate for Member of European Parliament? The problem is wider than the BNP though. Economic crises usually sow ideological conflision in all spheres of life and among all social groups. When the regularity of everyday life is upset by a new situation with no clear rules of behaviour, the door is wide open for ideologies and movements which promise order and identity in the face of adversity. Anyone who grew up in 1990s Serbia will know, the mass delirium thrown up around religious or national mythology, widespread respect for astrologers and clairvoyants, the prominence of mafiosi in urban life, and the emergence of new pop art forms appealing to base human emotions, in times of economic collapse and wartime. (Sentence doesn't end). The rise of the far right then, often sponsored by the state apparatus itself, is impossible without a pre-existing milieu that prevents the activities of such groups to be perceived as beyond the pale. Serbia, though, is just one illustration I am acquainted with at first hand. What about the flourishing of the American evangelical movement under the shadow of Reaganomics? What about the rise of Dugin Eurasianism to celebrity in Yeltsin's Russia? Let us not forget the latest scandal to hit the Vatican. Bishop Richard Williamson, excommunicated in 1988 for being consecrated without papal approval, had his excommunication lifted by Pope Benedict XVI last month, despite having expressing controversial views on the Holocaust in an interview with Swedish television in November. All of these examples show that the ground is ready for the emergence of a militant far right. That is why, when Michael Rock, national chair of Conservative Future, gives off the appearance of being more interested in defining the BNP as 'left wring' fascists than m backing campaigns against fascism and racism, we should be more than worried. The left has a glorious and unparalleled history in combating fascism. Perhaps no more is necessary to back this claim than to bring up the International Brigades and fight against fascism in Spain in the 1930s. Closer to home, we have shown how vibrant and powerfiil a multinational, multiracial and multicultural movement can be in the form of the anti-War movement. It is surely a better launching pad for the fight against the recession than vile racism and militant nationalism. Viridian A tale of a pesticide and unnecessaiy evil Justus RoUin Environment and Ethics officer Despite decades of health and environmental controversy, pesticides are still vndely used and remain highly controversial. The one pesticide that has evoked the greatest deluge of public and scientific debate and criticism is DDT. First developed in the late Nineteenth century, it became widely used as "effective" insecticide in the 1940s and 1950s. Soon, questions over its impact on health and wildlife were raised. But it was not untU the publication of Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring" in 1962 did the public and policy makers become fully aware of the impending crisis. Countries began responding to the DDT threat. Hungary led the way, banning the chemical in 1968, followed by others such as the United States in 1972. In 2004, the Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants banned among other pesticides DDT - allowing only a restricted use in disease vector control. The chemical is still regarded, controversially, by many as an effective mean for malaria contiol. Surely, they argue, malaria is a disease that far too many people around the world are left vulnerable to, and DDT represents a necessary evil to save lives. According to the World Health Organisation, there are around 250 million malaria cases each year, resulting in about a million deaths - 90 per cent of them in Africa, with the majority of victims being children below five years of age. While DDT was banned primarily for its negative impact on ecosystems and animals, research has also linked DDT to human diseases, such as breast cancer and other fatal illnesses. It bio-accumulates in fat tissues of humans and animals alike. DDT can even be found in polar bears as well as in breast milk of mothers in Europe (where it had been long banned) and Africa (where it is still widely used), often at levels far exceeding the safe limits of DDT for infants. Apart from the health and environmental implications, DDT's effectiveness against mosquitoes is merely temporary: mosquitoes will eventually become resistant to this toxic pesticide! In India for example, the use of DDT led to an initial decrease in malaria cases from 6.5 million to 50,000 cases per year, however the amount of cases has gone up to 6.5 million again due to mosquitoes developing a resistance for DDT. The use of DDT in fighting malaria is a contentious issue, since Western environmentalists are often excused of green imperialism, while there are other urgent issues that many developing countries have to deal with. However, ignoring the health implication of DDT and not looking for other possibilities to control malaria, such as biological control, is barely acceptable. Moreover, it is still mainly chemical corporations from the rich north who are profiting from the sale of DDT - so the true winners in the game of deadly pesticides are hardly the potential victims of malaria. Measured musings The battle between our best instincts With the LSE Not for Profit campaign gaining steam; collecting 450 signatures on a letter to Howard Da-vies against the "decline in quality and unethical treatment of the LSE", it is perhaps apt to note that in the 2007-8 session, there were 8,777 full time students at the LSE. Leaving out the part-time students, this makes the 450 signatures, while a valiant effort, still merely 5 per cent of the school's populace. The sentiment behind this campaign is noble, and what it is fighting for is something that all students at the LSE or any other institution should desire - putting the student experience at the heart of decision making, receiving a holistic education and not merely a brand name on a piece of paper, and a socially responsible investment policy, amongst other things. Despite the idealistic strain of thought behind the campaign - why just 5 per cent of the student population? Is there a trade-off that we as students, and many people around the world, have to accept? Yes, we do not study in the most homely of campuses in the country; yes. we do not receive the best teaching despite the amount that we pay for our education (particularly international students) - but perhaps the primary reason behind the lack of mass support for the campaign is that ultimately that the average LSE student does not really care. More than just a matter of apathy, however, perhaps the brand-driven education that we receive at the LSE is all that most of the students really desire. The unyielding debate between pragmatism and idealism seems to have a particular significance here. Many LSE students complain affectionately about the school, but are never driven enough to do ah3fthing about their littie grievances. They feel that ultimately, they have gotten what they came for - it is undeniable that the LSE brand name carries you rather far in the working world, and that it is one of the best universities in terms of employ-ability. Despite how the current economic crisis may have hurt every sector imaginable, there have been tales of LSE students rejecting job offers and internships from investment banks or various prestigious law firms. Similarly, many countries and societies have wdllingly accepted their limited political and civil freedoms as long as they have a degree of affluence and prosperity. Intangible merits such as these, or moral and ethical concerns like those that LSE Not For Profit are championing, are usually secondaty concerns. The clamour for political freedoms and rights are usually bom when economic structures start to collapse, or when affluence is so prevalent that there is nothing to risk with social unrest. This is definitely the case in Singapore - most people are willing to accept government restrictions on press freedom and the freedom of speech as long, as they continue to prosper economically and maintain their relatively high standards of living. Again the precedence of pragmatic concerns seems to withstand the inner idealism and yearning for intangible gratifications. Of course, this is not necessarily the right attitude. I once met a French student in an international conference, who. told me that Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar territories do not deserve to be called "countries" as they lack a certain spirit that is a precondition for being a "citizen". According to him, if all the populace is concerned about is money and prosperity, they do not and cannot encompass the fiill "spirit" of what it means to belong to a nation. Unduly critical as this may be, he did have somewhat of a point. This sounds familiar; many times I have heard students at the LSE lament that this school hardly feels like a school, but an institution that merely prepares you for the corporate, working world and adult life. Whatever an individual's view on these individual campaigns such as LSE Not for Profit and the broader issue of student, even political and civil rights, we have to concede that it is necessaty to have groups that fight for something more -however unattainable this may be. If all of us give in to pragmatism and settle for the tangible too often and too easily, we will lose any hope of bettering our existence. As long as we still have our youth, we must never let idealism die. Shibani Mahtani Features Editor i8 The Beaver 1 lo February, 2009 Features fe'ii ' •?' ' ^'vvVf. •%':"• A MJItl Ui norodniri iHEViii IEL i?i7 &tniTi vm unit ifs f*TO HI If4% v'' ,4?.e mmiimi mmi I94B \U^ ??• .4i^-. ¦¦ SITI0.RC ¦ &l S #^.V. -. ..' ' ¦ ¦ ¦ 'Si^C /¦¦ /Bk »¦«».;« tu T t i .' A foibe memorial in Trieste. Flickr user pollabarc^ Timely ode of remembrance Giorgio Daniele Lizzul relates the nearly-lost memoiy of the tragic 'foibe' killings in Istria For Italians, lO February marks the National Memorial Day of Exiles and the Foibe - a date for the remembrance of the victims of the 'foibe' massacres and the exiles of Istria and the Julian provinces -Italy's former Dalmatian territories. Sixty-two years ago, the fate of 350,000 Italian Istrians and Dalmatians was sealed as the Allied forces drew up the new post-war borders. Italy lost the vast majority of Istria and all of its Dalmatian territories to the newly formed Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, ending decades of Slavic nationalist aspirations for these provinces. Most people would be forgiven for not knowing this little-mentioned piece of post-war history. In fact, many Italians would struggle to even place Istria on a map, let alone remember these events. Istria, a small peninsula surrounded by the Adriatic sea and flanked by Italy to the west and Croatia to the east, has traditionally been seen as Italy's eastemly-most province. The region has has long been home to an ethnically-mixed population, which prior to the Second World War was split between Istrian Italians and Croatians, each comprising roughly half of the population. With the demise of fascist Italy and the Italian Social Republic, the aftermath of fascist policies, the likes of forced 'Ital-ianisation' and the repression of the Slavic population, gave rise to severe reprisals against the Istrian and Dalmatian Italians. Italians were regarded as fascists, and under the cover of the liberation and resistance movements, a policy of violence and ethnic cleansing began to emerge against Italians, fascists and non-fascists alike. The term 'foibe' has now become an infamous one to many from Istria. The 'foibe' are best descriljed as naturally occurring underground chasms with small, often obscured, entrances on the ground surface, but descend hundreds of metres into the Earth. 'Foibe' are extremely prevalent throughout Istria, and gained their notoriety during the period from 1943 to 1947 when they were accorded the new fiinction - mass graves for thousands of Istrians, who met their end in these deep abysses as retribution for twenty years of fascist rule. Some were guilty of collaboration with the fascists, but many were not. The indiscriminate nature of the killing was perhaps best highlighted by the killing of Communist Italian Istrians, who, despite having previously fought alongside their Slavic Istrian brothers to overthrow the forces of fascism under Tito's Partisan forces, were dealt the same fate as collaborators were. An estimated 10,000 to 30,000 Istrian Italians were executed in the foibe, but it is likely that the exact numbers will never be known. The killings were performed in an extremely brutal manner: victims were tortured, raped and mutilated before being throwp into the 'foibe', often while still alive. The violence and intimidation that emanated from the Slavic reprisals led to many Italians leaving their homeland for Most people would be forgiven for not knowing this little-mentioned piece of post-war history Italy. The situation of the Istrian Italians was further exacerbated by the Italian government's inability to negotiate seriously for the protection of its eastern population. In fact, it spent more time at the 1946 Paris peace conference trying to negotiate the saving of Italy's North and East African colonies as well as the maintenance of its navy, rather than protecting and securing the future of many of its citizens. After negotiations failed to even secure the future of Italian-dominated Istrian cities in the post-war period, the exodus began. Cities experienced large decreases in their populace; Pula saw 30,000 of its 34,000 population leave. To avoid the permanent reminder of the loss of the Julian territories, Istrian exiles dispersed themselves across Italy, and eventually throughout the world. Following the exodus, decades of silence dominated the Italian political spectrum on the Istrian question, with the exception of neo-fascist parties who stiU maintained claims for the Julian provinces. In 1975, Italy finally ended all claims to the lost territories of Istria and the issue began to decline in significance and interest. This changed, however, in 2005 when Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi's coalition government introduced a national . memorial day on the 10 February with the backing of the majority of political parties. The introduction of the day of remembrance was met with support even from many of the descendant parties of the Italian Communist party, who had for decades tried to cover up the massacres as fascist propaganda and only recently began to acknowledge the atrocities. However this new interest in the 'foibe' massacres and the subsequent exodus are also seen as an attempt by Italian far right to mask the many fascist atrocities which had befallen the other half of the population under Mussolini, and tarnish the legacy of the resistance movements which helped overthrow the fascists and Nazis firom Istria. Unsurprisingly, this move coincided with recent attempts by the Italian right to mask Italy's dark fascist past. Political contentions aside, what progress and developments have there been for the Italian Istrian immigrants? With Croatia's hopes for entry into the European Union, there has been increased impetus for an overhaul of restrictive laws that prohibit Italians from buying property in Istria. The property market there had been closed internationally, so as to discourage a 'resettlement' of the land by Italians. The new property liberalisation will allow many Istrian exiles to return and re-acquire land they had lost. Furthermore, the recognition of Istria as a dual-language area has helped a process of acceptance emerge over the area's history and mixed cultural heritage. Yet the Italian community in Istria, now comprising no more than 7 per cent of the Istrian population, wiU forever remain a shadow of its former pre-war self - a visible testament to the ravages of ethnic cleansing. Social 19 10 February 2009 | The Beaver Fashionable h3rpen'eality Flickr user Ammar Abd Rabbo ;Ashmi Kunde pays tribute to the art of couture o nee upon a time, there was a palatial white room where every pillar and banister was adorned with paper roses, it magnolias and camellias. vThe guests waited expectantly, in an ;:atmosphere scented with anticipation "and too much expensive perfume. And : then they appeared: A stream of beautiful princesses, descending into the room to the sound of an enchanting melody. They were dressed in the 65 pristine j^reations of Karl Lagerfeld, immaculately ¦ait^d embellished with lace, crystals and sequins. And each girl wore upon her head a magnificent floral tiara, entirely hand-crafted from ordinary copy paper by , Japanese hairdresser Katsuya Kamo. Welcome to Chanel's haute couture showing, considered "the most magical show" of Paris Couture Week 2009, the biannual fashion phenomenon which took place last week. Don't let your mind dwell too much upon how such a theatrical performance can be termed a 'fashion show', or even how such a thing is being staged in such depressing financial times. Leave all practicality and reality at the door, for these are the realms of the creme de la creme of fashion. Haute couture (literally, 'high dressmaking') traditionally refers to one-of-a-kind, luxurious garments, meticulously made using the most time-consuming of methods. Ever since its formal establishment, the label of'couture' could only be used by fashion houses who met the criteria of the 'Chambre Sjmdicale de la Haute Couture'. Today, these rules of exclusivity still exist, but the definition of couture has changed. Now the essence of this world lies more in its ability to pull apart the threads of realism and hand sew them into sheer fantasy. Couture aspires to be something, anything, everything unimaginable. It is visible and tangible proof of how fabrics can be designed, decorated and draped on the human form to create something extraordinary. It would be foolish to search for only fashion in haute couture. Which is why, for me, couture is nothing short of art. This year I watched the Christian Dior show, which was inspired by Flemish paintings, in awe. The models emerged from behind huge stained glass screens and sashayed down the runway in yards of sUk and satin. I envied those models for having the touch of a John Galliano garment against their skin. Each and every one of those dream-like dresses left me spellbound. It's only once the curtains fell that I remembered the fact that I will never have the money, figure or occasion to wear such masterpieces. Upon leaving this fairytale world, practicality and reality came back to remind me that we are facing the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Undoubtedly high fashion spells out even higher prices. So how does the market for haute couture still exist? They say if you ask the price of something, you can't afford it. V^ich is probably why the buyers and sellers involved in the business don't seem to question the sky-high expenses involved. And the shocking thing is, the outfits actually need to have some of those extra zeros on their price tags. It may seem ludicrous to fork out £50,000 for a Chanel couture gown, but this includes (amongst a range of other things) the cost of at least 800 hours of dress-making, including the laborious task of individually embroidering on each pearl and sequin, and hand-cutting leaves and flowers to trim the hems. And then come the price of the ostentatious displaying of these clothes. The Dior show cost £2 million to put together. Perhaps an astounding sum of money for us, but clearly not for the fashion house, which has seen annual sales increases of 35 per cent since 2007. Chanel has declared a 20 per cent escalation in sales from last year and is expecting a further increase for 2009. Forecasters at Givenchy also see a 20 per cent increase in sales for 2009. But where are these sales coming from? Who generates the demand for this supply of high fashion? The limited number of high end consumers. This whole industry lies in the hands of these few hundred extremely rich people whose bank accounts keep them on safe distant shores, whilst the rest of the world drowns in economic despair. Last year, despite a loss in clientele from the States, it was the newly-rich customers from the Middle East, Russia and China who kept the demand alive. There is this eternal existence of ultra-rich consumers, who are willing to forego the purchase of a small house in exchange for a single item on clothing, which will probably see the light of day (or the flash of cameras) a single time. As much as I would desperately love to have my wardrobe bursting at the seams "There's a credit crunch, not a creative crunch" - John GaUiano with Dior, I am only a mere mortal - a student living in London, whose current fashion mantra is along the lines of 'recessionista chic'. I frequently scour high street stores for that rare combination of something attractive and affordable. As the effects of the credit crunch spread far and wnde, I feel guilty about my own (often excessive) fashion purchases, and frequently end up crossing off clothing items from my shopping list. So, despite having just openly declared my love for the dream works, I find something slightly distastefial in the fact that certain people are still able to spend an average person's annual salary on one garment. Especially when that average person probably lost that salary, due to one of the 76,000 job cuts that happened during the very Same week as Paris Couture. The couture industry is anything but on the brink of ruin. And it's making it globally evident in the most expensive of ways possible. Haute couturiers have even been compared to Marie Antoinette, for giving the impression of declaring, "If there are no clothes, then let them wear couture!" Personally, I don't see it quite that way. It is doubtfiil that fashion designers are so wrapped up in their creativity that they remain completely oblivious to obvious current affairs. Perhaps they just believe that those affairs have less so to do with them. If couture is made as a form of creative expression, displayed to maintain the prestige of the fashion house, and sold because a client held a whimsy of being adorned in luxury, then where does the outside world come into the equation? Does the industry really need to tone down its decadence to mourn for dearly departed financial institutions? Are we right in making critical, cynical comments? Or are we merely casting our jealous eyes on this market which is still untainted by the darkness of economic downturn? Like 1 said, couture is art. And like all other art forms, is it an escape from reality, with no rules and no budget constraints. "There's a credit crunch, not a creative crunch," said John GaDiano, after his flamboyant Dior show. "Of course, everyone is being more carefiil with their discretionary purchases. I am. But it's our job to make people dream." Translating these dreams into realify continues to be an expensive hobby, but art and business are two sides of the same glittering coin of couture. The undeniable truth is that the dismal economic circumstances have spelled anything but 'The End' to the world of couture. And so it continues to live happily, fashionably, expensively ever after. Campaign profile Reduce, Re-use, Relove! Hamet facln' irw • waiaatu, You were the passionate/angiy girl at the UGM, my voice was drowned out by the crow^. Some -i might say I belong in a Zoo, cause ' I'm an animal if you know what I mean. Let me t^e you into the jungle. - You were the tall, dark one with the bidgingbiceps who suggested ? I drop by your office hou^ so that you could address my welfare. Expect me to drop by. If any of these individuals-happens to be you then just a dropfus an e-'>= mail at s.port^(a)thebeav|;ror4i»£.-co.uk and we'll put you straight in touch with your lost love. •), PARTe lizcheesbrough a welsh revolution and lollipops calumyoune laments middle england's move to the suburbs CTV angelachow, the addictive awfulness of skins IWSUALARTS chnstinaschmidt zur nedden babylon exhibition reviewed tSCENTREt a modern map of cultural britain liammclaughlin&cathydruce franz ferdinand and a kin^ blur 12 FILM ti«iitma3niard shane meadows and Winnipeg 13 THEATRE loisjean^ british theatre rules MSEX&OENDER helenreeves following the feminist fight 14 IDENTITY loulsaevahs the queen is dead, boys I5F08D sophiemarment bloomin' hesthental This week we honour the country in which you are currently standing, ignoring our better instincts to indulge in sweaty nationalist fervour. Blighty has made a few mistakes over the years, but here we tactfully ignore them and concentrate on the happy times, like week-long cricket matches and acid house. And, before you decide to leave the country in disgust, just remember that at least we haven't gone bankrupt, like Iceland. SACNINPATEL& JULIAN B8YS FAQ! FAXI FACTS! Dear Jvilian, I lost my child in a snowdrift last Monday: is there any chance you can put up an appeal for information in next week's issue? It's still pretty icy out there, and I'm worried he's mutated into a penguin. Anna Molly Dear Sachin, I found the content of last week's partB highly offensive. As I sit here and flick through the lurid photos of obese men abusing innocent kittens, I question your judgement. Oh wait. This is the magazine I found under my flatmate's bed. Nevermind. Cyril McParvel Spraemebirrel camp america, fuck yeah! the soundtrack to the new notorious b.i.g. biopic with bare wicked trax, including biggie classics and a new song by jay-z! just find a link between gangster rap and a british cream tea, and email it to THEBEAVER.PARTB@CMAILCOM PfMTD meganjones is representing for the valleys Britain does not exist, has never existed, and will never exist. Since people have inhabited this land we have divided and defined ourselves according to a feeling of belonging, be that to family, community or nation. The dividing lines between tribes, peoples and nations have varied greatly over time, but the lack of a one-size-fits-all concept of "British" identity has not. We are four distinct nations, each with our own cultures, identities and traditions, and no amount of integration will ever change this. We may share a respect or reverence for vague, universal concepts such as equality, justice, freedom, law and order, but this is not a sufficient foundation for a coherent nation. These shared values are not exclusive to England, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. How many other nations are based upon these veiy same principles, and do all these, therefore, automatically come under Britain's dominion? 'Revolution will come to Wales, just you wait.' , It is most ironic that values such as freedom, equality and justice were the last things on the minds of the English parliament and monarch when the concept of Britain was enshrined in law. The Act of Union 1536, which unified England and Wales, legalised inequality on the grounds of race and language. The Welsh could not hold official positions or enter certain towns in their own nation, English was made the official language of Wales, and the people became sec- ond class citizens within their own land. This] began a policy of subjugation and oppression that was felt in Ireland, Scotland and Wales for subsequent centuries. However, it is too ea^ to believe that this policy is ancient history - it is not. It was only during my father's childhood that children at-tending the local school began to receive their education through the medium of Welsh. In 1965, the Welsh village of Cwm Celyn was drowned, its inhabitants displaced and a community destroyed in order to safeguard a plentiful supply of water for the developing city of Liverpool. Being British meant having one's home demolished, 0 chapel razed to the ground, community scat- , tered to the four winds and the graves of/-relatives desecrated as the graveyard was,', ^ -.;, : flooded. This was allowed to happen, in'; ; ; ; fact positively encouraged, by the British government, who did not care that' one part of Britain was being ripped apart against the wiU of its people. Today I do not have Ae right to receive|,.i,^,^ basic services in my mother tongue, a right ^ "" taken for granted by most individuals. Banks, supermarketsandhighstreetstoresfv ' are more than happy to take my money, but extremely reluctant to respect myj linguistic identity, and the freedom and rights it entails. ¦ Is it any wonder that some people, reflise to be labelled as British given thef repression, inequality and oppressionj implicit in the concept's development? I for one see the label as a chain l^at connects me to my ancestors' repression and the sooner \it is broken the better. As my friend Dafydd Roberts used to say: "Revolution will come to Vales, just you wait." P reaganpersaud is sweet for his sweets ou should stop eating those, it'U make your teeth rot Alas, no such risk faces the youth of today. Whilst it will always be a pleasurable past-time reflection for us young adults who grew up in British society, the children of tomorrow's tomorrow have given up on loUipops; one of the greatest traditional sweet shop joys. Stores have decided that the lollipop business just isn't cost effective enough anymore, making it almost impossible to find a single lollipop anywhere unless you buy wholesale. The fact is that most of us have forgotten how much joy this sweet treat used to bring. Fair enough, a loUipop just isn't the sort of thing you walk around the LSE licking away on. The young-adult of.today has to fit certain criteria, and un-fortunatefy a penchant for lickable sticks doesn't seem to be on the plan for public perfection. But just because we aren't allowed to appreciate this treat in public doesn't mean that anyone forgets how amazing it was as a child. Everyone loved lollipops. They were the sweet of our generation, the perfect treat whenever you felt like it! Everybody indulged as they we're readily available all over Britain. But now, things have changed... My sudden craving on our beautifiU snow day lead me to Tesco, Sainsbuiy, Asda, newsagents, corner stores... none of which sold lollipops! Sure there is the silly drumstick substitute but some of us like to chew the rock! I finally found one in the atural History Museum - I repeat, a HISTORY useum. Our token candy, a lasting iymbol of ritish childhood, takes its place amongst di-losaur bones and plastic blue whales. A treat ithat all British students once savoured has :ow become... extinct. The idea that such a treat could be dying out may seem absurd, but in fact production of the lollipop in Britain has plummeted by 60 per cent in the last ten years. By the time we decide to raise childreiit there will probably be none of these teeth-rotters around. What's happened to British society that has resulted in the removal of such small joys? The bigger question - or fear - is what will be removed next? Britain has always been a nation that prides itself on being able to supply to meet demand. And alhof a sudden there has been a total dismissal of something which was very important to young Britons. The simple fact is that British society has forgotten our treat; forgotten its significance amongst other great childhood touchstones such as the zoo, pokemori, and spin the bottie. We appear to have forgotten our past. The adverts of yestetyear still ring in my ears, the flavours stiU lingers in my mouth. The soft centre still makes me smUe. And yet this beautiful simple piece of sweetness has been removed firom the markets to make room for 21st century substitute 'delicacies'. It's not often that we can say 'back in the good old days' but today I say for aU us lollipop lovers...LET'S GO BACK TO THE GOOD OLD DAYS! 4 SVBSRBI6IDE 3 PflftTft "¦'i r:r?>-v-- sr-s==---^:-r evr^:;,,,^.... ca!aiBr|>ungaiids1 FWWS «• S >N The nub of British social histoiy runs thus: man enters city; man hastily vacates it for the suburbs. Look to any Briton in possession of a double garage, a couple of kids, and a mortgage, and you will find a dystopian view of city life. British anti-urbanism is a marketable product: brands like Pringle and Hackett make it their business to sell green pasture one tweed blazer at a time, albeit at prices that only a city salary can afford. But British anti-urbanism goes beyond distaste for all things city; it's a social trend which teUs us a great deal about British society. It must have been as a result of a farming accident that suburban Britain forgot that cities aire nothing more than a concrete manifestation of the people in them. The righteous anger of our middle-brow is willing to pour forth on all city goings-on and, in the same breath, we attack the' people that live in them. In this sense, contempt for cities reveals a shocking pessimism in modem society. It must be the contention of anyone who hates the city that those people they brush up against will harm them more than they will help them. Will they be worse off for greater in7 teraction? The belief that they wrill be vrorse off for meeting new and different people is entwined virith the view that a homogenous community' is better than an open one. It's synonymous with xenophobia. As such, anti-urbanism also tells the stoiy of a fundamentally insular society. One that would sooner fence off its consciousness in suburbia, than have it meet politics, philosophies or cultures in any way out of the ordinary. Cities like London excel at bringing people from all over the world together: cliches of the melting-pot aside, anyone living in a major world city enjoys a mind-broadening experience. Whilst frantically searching for a seatbelt in a cab last week I was informed PARTD SUBURIICIDE S f V. ^^%''.^ yv? , vtjf :m m j^stopia in suburbia ISJ*. if ^'il'irwrygwj gigjig wfwm jfvjir«r by an Italian friend that, at home, wearing a seat-belt while on the road was considered a slur on the driver's ability. Foreign perspectives on the same things are magically enriching moments; only in a midticultural city are they possible. Anti-ur-banism to this extent represents a desire to avoid those who are not like 'us'. But through demarcating 'us' and 'them' so ruthlessly, the society in question is changing for the worse. It is also the case that through co-existing only with those who we have vetted, as most do in the countryside, British society is becoming considerably more atomised. People are being geographically grouped by their politics, wealth and age. Political pollsters can more often than not guess party allegiances when given a postcode. Is this a social trend that we should be encouraging? Conversely, in London, with the exception of a few wholly elite districts, most areas tell us nothing more about those that live in them than their address. It's a blessing of the twenty-first century city that two individuals inhabiting almost the same strip of physical space can have backgrounds which are totally alien to each other. Social atomisation in rural districts encourages the worst tendencies in human nature; in the absence of common ground between citizens, it also poses a threat to the liberal state. Anti-urbanism is also the condition of an irrational society. A society that has been bewitched into thinking that natural and perfect equates to goodness and happiness. Between organic yoghurt and that claim made by so many lost fem^e fortysomethings that "it's my natural colour", British society has fallen out of love vrith man-made creations. For it is just as ea^ to find beauty in the scenety inside the M25 as it is outside it. All major cities have architectural "contributions which can be considered breathtaking, which were created in the modem era. A personal favourite of mine, to be found in London, is the stunning Art-deco creation on Fleet Street which used to house the Daily Express. The active pursuit of a bucolic way of life in the countty, even if it means a 2 hour commute, also represents the belief that the past will always be better than the fiiture. Those hankering after the country are in truth looking to import a style of living from the nineteenth century, in rejection of the city which has become synonymous in many minds with modernity and, in particular, modem social ills. Yet surely what modernity has to offer is greater than the past. We now live in a society which is more meritocratic, wealthier and more equal than that of the years which those who reject the city are looking to recreate. Certainly we are hardwired for nostalgia, yet in its anti-urban manifestation it's an essentially irrational condition. To reject development strikes at the vety core of human society. This is a pessimism which dare not speaks its name, yet it is one omnipresent in British society today. And so it is that an Englishman's home became his fortress when he moved to the country. A gu4rd against all those who haven't been vetted and invited in for canapes. It is to the individual's detriment that he or she no longer wishes to mix with those that are not like them. We must go back to the future in order to rekindle the belief that what we create tomorrow will be better than today. Indeed, it was not ever thus. British culture positively oozed a belief in the future and, more specifictdly, a belief in the city during the late 1970s. For that generation, who believed in the 'white heat' of tJie technological revolution, the fiiture promised more than Ae past. It still does today, and it lies in the city. 6 TV pflRte aanrongammalliere doesn't like it but will still watch it 1 hate Skins', 1 said. 'Write an article abput it, then', I was asked. 'OK', I responded. I didn't say an3fthing at the time, but I wasn't looking forward to this. My relationship with this cult show is, at best, tempestuous. Like most people of my geWeratibn, I was absorbed ih curiosity when the show was about to make its debut in 2007. Everyone remembers the two minute trailer showing rambunctious teenagers making out, drinking, and being downright wild in some poor mug's gaff, all to the tune of NME anthem, 'Standing In The Way Of Control.' Anticipation was high, and so too were expectations. Finally, there would be a show I could relate to that wovdd define the lost and alienated generation of my youth, which would reflect the lifestyles of every teenager in Britain. For too long, British teens had been subjected to Califomian counterparts trying to deal with the tribulations of getting their Porsche fixed or getting rid of the $3000 overdraft on daddy's credit card. Shows like The OC and Gossip Girl have no relevance to teenagers this side of the Atlantic. Life isn't always sunny, hardly ever that rich and never that plastic and nauseating. Skins promised to be the remedy to all the American tripe that many had unfortunately grown up around. So, on a Thursday, at 10 pm, I sat. I watched. I watched some more. And as 11 pm neared, I realised two things: firstly, that this show would be massive; and secondly, that it was really bad. The acting was, at times, unbearable, and, aside firom that Sid dude, the one with the hat I myself am guilty of wearing firom time to time, the characters were completely unbelievable. The plot seemed turgid and forced while the dialogue was wholly embarrassing. Despite this, however, I dabbled now and then, to see if I had missed out. I saw a guy being forced to get jiggy with his sister, and I saw Sid confess his love to an anorexic. That's all I can remember. For all of my criticisms, though, it was, as I had guessed, a hit. I would hear the trendy girls who never look twice at a guy like me around High Street Kensington talk about it, I would hear four-teen-year-olds say how fit Tony was (do none of you realise he was that fat kid in 'About A Boy'?!) and everywhere, naughty teenagers were having 'Skins-parties' at their picturesque, middle-class suburban houses . And so, it did what I thought it would: define a generation. The British OC, in all its decadent glory, had arrived. The following year, series two began. Though that didn't seem to do as well", it still attracted fanatics of the first season, and themed itself around the same premise of sex, drugs, and not nearly enough rock and roll. Were the forty year-old writers of the show about youth hitting a deadend? What else could they write about? After all, not much constitutes teenage years, besides getting girls and getting stoned, right? They could never write about something as true to life as getting buUied or struggling to find a job, or hating school, or not getting girls, could they? That would be far too realistic. So we were left wdth a clone. 2009 arrived, and a third series came. A new cast, a new college and a new start; I intended to enjoy this one, I really did. I was introduced to the first character, Freddie, with an implausible skateboarding sequence down a steep road. Clearly not the actor, the accomplished stand-in narrowly avoided a bus and bumped into a policeman, forcing him to drop his strawberry Cornetto on his groin; Freddie will inevitably be the protagonist of the show, and this was my first disappointment. Both the first and second series were led by a 'fittie', vnth the same hair, bad-boy attitude (with a soft heart, of course) and play-by-my-:rules mantra. I foolishly believed that the third season would adopt a more bold and audacious approach to the show, possibly warranting a female protagonist, or at least a less polished, side-fringed poser that seem to dominate the airwaves of alternative teUy these days. The character and his direction is predictable; doomed to become smitten with a girl he can't have, and slowly self-destruct in an orgy of promiscuity and friendship fall-outs. More characters were gradually introduced. JJ, the swatty loser whose intelligence makes him a girl-repellent (and I thought my apparent intelligence would attract girls) and the third amigo. Cook, a well-acted and surprisingly refreshing character, bucking the trend of the show's usual constructs. The latter of these characters, however, was the only plausible creation amidst what was a humiliating showcase of every teenage stereotype imaginable. We are introduced to Pandora, a ditsy blonde who isn't the sharpest tool in the box, twins Katie and EmUy, the chalk and cheese pair, one confident and in a relationship, the other self-loathing and reserved, and who's never had a 'bf'. None of these tired characters, all of which can easily be seen in John Hughes' 'The Breakfast Club', a film twenty years its elder, compare to the abysmally constructed monster that is Effy. She, as Tony's younger sister, has adopted a persona many viewers of the first season saw coming; a panda-eyed vixen, who likes to flirt, and is partial to eating boys for breakfast. Clearly, writers saw this despondent and troubled character as a perfect outlet for needless sex and a possible OD, as well as a pathetic attempt to add a sanctimonious moral message 'drugs are bad and so am r, despite the show's perpetual and subversive glorification of that exact lifestyle, often depicting the morning-after regret in a man ner of perverse enjoyment. Not content to shove the poor actress into a one-dimensional role, the writers saw it as their duly to make Effy's final scene a quickie in the nurse's office. Such a juxtaposition is cringe-worthy. And I bet he didn't rubber up. Unfortunately, the nauseating plethora of characters was just the tip of the Topshop-gar-ment-laden iceberg. 'Funny' consisted of rude geriatrics, public flashing, farting down a megaphone, and poorly delivered slapstick. At times, the humour had remnants of The Benny Hill Show, with cheelgf jokes about the giggle-induc-ing topic of sex, and out-dated innuendo. I myself was wondering whether this was a feeble attempt at irony, or a genuine excuse to please the show's slags-to-be demographic. I found myself chuckling for all the wrong reasons, and becoming quite uncomfortable at the fact that some poor writer thought this would actuaUy pass as ihumorous. Granted, creating a funny script is aiidemanding task, but to consolidate that with hyperbolised flatulence and general over'^acting leavefs me feeling sorry for the actors of the show. With a script as diabolically bad as this, one cannot hold them completely responsible for their lacklustre performances (with the exception of Cook, played very well by Jack O'.Connell, who is the only salvaging feature , of the Show at this point.) And so, for a few months at least. Skins wiU be the word on every trendy kid's lips, leaving me thoroughly on the sidelines for another year. Despite its flaws, it still makes for compulsive viewing, if only to see what ridiculous escapades the 'gang' will get up to next, and is an hour of your week not totally wasted. Do I hate it? Yes. Is it bad? Yes. Will I watch it every Thursday? Yes, and for that, I feel quite ashamed. * pmtD VISUU.ARTS I stephenminas on nqrth ami reality thranghont the ages Herodotos insisted that "in magnificence there is no other city that approaches Babylon". Some of the relics of this magnificent city are on display in the British Museum; monuments of one empire on display within a monument of another. Iliis is a fitting reflection of Babylon's history; the Fertile Crescent (or the 'Futdle Crescent', as it is under current management) is a graveyard of empires, but the Babylonians got there first. The sweep of empires has left its mark. The Stela of Nabonidus, Babylonia's final king, is displayed with its officii inscription deliberately erased - probably on the orders of Cjrrus, after the Persians took Babylon in 539 BC. Under Cyprus' successors, things got worse. Herodotos tells us that Darius plotted to "cany off a solid gold statue, "but had not the hardihood to lay his hands upon it". His son, Xerxes, had no such qualms, killing the statue's priest and spiriting it oflf. Persians, Greeks, more Persians and Ottomans all came and went. In 2003, the occup3ring Americans converted the ancient city into Camp Babylon. Damage was done and is currently being assessed. The striking photos of American soldiers at work among the ruins are reminders that history can never be completely cordoned off into ages. Babylon, once looted by the Persians, now lies at the heart of the 'Mess O'Potamia' of Bush and Saddam. There are other artefacts on display, the most spectacular being a lion and a mushhushshu ('fiirious snake') dragon commissioned by King Nebuchadnezzar in the sixth century. Glazed into brick, enigmatic and unknowable, these figures lined the Processional Way - the only paved street in town - and guided those who passed below in their devotions. Smaller relics offer insights on a more human scale. There is a tablet, c. 100 BC, of Greek crib notes on the Babylonian language, hinting at some of the difficulties that Alexander's successors must have had. From the sixth century BC comes the 'first map of the world', naturally with Babylon at its centre (what people has ever imagined itself an3rwhere else?). "The map locates gods, monsters and heroes, which this part of the world has never lacked. But here, the exhibition changes abruptly, and instead of more priceless artefacts there are latter day interpretations of Babylon. There are sixteenth and seventeenth century engravings of the 'Wonders of the World'. There is Escher's 'Tower of Babel' woodcut. Some items are only tenuously coimected to Babylon. Diirer's 'Penance of St John Chrysostom', the great Doctor of the Eastern churches, is included as a 'key source' for Blake's forlorn 'Nebuchadnezzar'. Then a West Indian on video loop armounces that Rastafarians equate Babylon with oppression and human destruction. This is apparently because the Old Testament Nebuchadnezzar, scourge of the Jews, "represents the entire West-em system of oppression, erosion of values, selfishness, capitalism... the people who nm America..." Just as discordant is a painting by Michael Lassel, who grew up under a dictatorship in Romania and has painted the Tower of Babel as a pile of shoes. There is also evidence of Babylon's significance to modem Iraq. Propaganda murals in the drab realist style show Saddam Hussein as the successor to the Babylonian kings. There he is, sitting astride the magnificent Ishtar Gate! Absurd and crass, this warns us what evety great culture can degenerate into. In their own way, these fragmentaty interpretations are vety much like the Tower of Babel, after God's timely intervention. Here we can see Durer, plainly mad Rastafarians and Saddam Hussein speaking past each other widi glorious abandon. The Babylon of 'reality* is overwhelmed by the manifold, clashing Babylons of | 'myth'. The large, mostly elderly audience would have come with their own preconceptions, as did I. But the exhibition will have left diem with no inkling of Babylonian law, which v«ras sophisticated; nor of Babylonian legend, which tells us much more about the Babylonians than the speculations of Israelites and Greeks can; nor of the fact that the first cities were in Mesopotamia. On these the exhibition is silent. Nor would they have leamt of Babylon's wisdom in medical matters: according to Herodotos, the Babylonians "have no physicians, but when a man is ill, they lay him in the public square, and the passers-by come up to him, and if thqr have ever had his ^sease themselves or have known any one who has suffered firom it, th^ give him advice, recommending him to do whatever th«y found good in their own case, or in the case knovra to them; and no one is allowed to pass the sick man in silence without asking him what his ailment is". A workable alternative to the NHS? 'Babylon: Myth and Reality demonstrates the hold that Babylon has on the Westem imagination. But where is Babylon as interpreted by its Eastem inheritors? Inaedibly, the only word here is given to Saddam and his awfid murals. -Babylon (with apologies to Vrettos, who was talking about Alexandria) has become a "city of the Westem mind". It seems nothing will redeem it from this fate. Certainly not Nebuchadnezzar's old rival, the God of the Old Testament who, if j this exhibition is anything to go by, still nurses a grudge. 'Babylon: Myth and Reality' is on until the istb of March in the British Museum Parties Piiltiirfd ]\fap of Hrltain % ^Wf ') PflRTD U W 070]] mathanbriant gets Idnlgr According to the BBC, in 2002 when the first 'Britishness' test was mooted for possible immigrants by the then Home Secretary, I David Blunkett, Norman Cook, aka Fatboy Slim, I thought the best thing about Britain was that 'most I people speak your language when you go abroad.' I Hmmm. Elton John said he loved the British 'sense I of humour.' We all have things we like about Brit-lain. Without getting too political or controversial, II think Bntain's just nice already: there's a certain I aspect of it that doesn't need celebrating. Waving a I flag around in Birmingham with a marching band Ibehind me like Boris Johnson did in Beijing last I summer wouldn't make me feel any more nation-laKstic than I do now. It'd just make me look like a Itwat. Walking in the British countryside is lovely; I the BBC is an institution that all British people can I be proud of, so is the NHS; and our pop music. Although there are some British bands that I are vastly overrated (just take Oasis and the com-I pletely ridiculous 'Champagne Supernova' with its I lines 'Slowly walking down the haU/faster than a Icannonball') Britain has produced some of the I best bands ever. The Beatles, The Jam and The I Libertines are quintessentiaUy British. However, I for the best examples of British bands, let's look to llheKinks and Blur. The Kinks were formed around MusweU HiU, I North London, in the early 1960s by their head guitarist and backing vocalist, Dave Da-Ivies, and Kinks bassist until the early 1970s, I Pete Quaife, when they were both at school. I Dave's older brother, Ray, joined soon after I and took the role of lead songwriter, lead I singer and rh)rthm guitarist; former Rolling I Stones drummer Mick Avory completed the I line-up. However, after an eponymous al-Ibum, released in 1964, with the exception I of 'Stop Your Sobbing' and 'You Re-I ally Got Me' there was reaUy nothing to I write home about. Their greatness was I only fulfilled after a couple of years of I experience as a professional band. Graham Coxon, Blur's recently-J returned guitarist met Damon Al-Ibam, lead singer and lead songwriter I at school, in Colchester, Essex, in the I mid-1980s when Coxon was thirteen land Albarn fourteen. Quickly becom-I ing friends, throughout their teens they I listened to classic British pop, like The I Specials, and as they got older, The I Smiths. Both active in the local music I scene, they met computer programmer I Dave Rowntree, who, in the late 1980s Iwas recruited by Coxon as the band's I drummer. At eighteen, Coxon moved I down to Goldsmiths College, London, to I study Fine Art, where he met the band's I bassist, then-French student, Alex James. I By 1991, they'd finished their first, and in I places, disappointing album. Leisure. The best thing about both bands lis that they don't necessarily celebrate I their Britishness outright, VE Day style, I but blend in other influences from out-Iside Britain. For example, although early I R'n'B heavily influenced the Kinks' work, I it wasn't particularly well-used, but in their later albums they learned to blend this with British poise (and, in a way, reticence). The same thing can't necessarily be said about Blur - at times their sound is unashamedly brazen, particularly on the self-titled 1997 album and 1999's 13. On tracks like 'Song 2' and 'Bugman' however, they can also have their meUow, heart-rendering moments, like in 'Beetiebum', 'Coffee & TV' and 'Out Of Time'. Really, I've been skirting round the issue. There are particular songs that are so brilliantiy British, and it's because of that I love them. 'Waterloo Sunset', by the Kinks, (on their best album, the 1967 Something Else By The Kinks), inspired me on arrival in September to inake several trips down from my halls just to imagine 'Terry and Julie' crossing over the river to Waterloo station. And it's so easy to imagine. "Dirty old river, must you keep rolling, flowing into the night". I just can't say how the start of that song makes me feel. Put in the best way I can, it's the best pop song ever recorded. Everjfthing about it is perfect. The chugging guitars in the background - the boats floating slowly down the Thames - the backing vocals: wonderfvd; the understated atmosphere of the song makes it as great as it is. The atmosphere of that song is unique to pretty much anything I've heard. Bloody marvellous. Although it would never match 'Waterloo Sunset's brilliance, 'For Tomorrow" is Blur"s 'British' track. (Others would argue that it's the shamefWly crap 'Country House' but that's so overtly and pathetically British it's a wonder they didn't exhume Winston Churchill for the video). A wistful track with 'a twentieth century girl' 'holding on for dear life', it's a song about middle class Britishness. The inspiration for this song, the first on their second album Modem Life is Rubbish, was the middle classes attitudes that all of the band members had grown up in and around, and the band's increasing annoyance with the Americanised British music scene, particularly the dominance of Nirvana. Again, the general atmosphere of the song is the best thing about it; I can relate to 'holding on to the wheel' and just 'waiting for tomorrow' in a British way. Somehow, I don't really think some Seattle scenester moshing to 'I Hate Myself &I Want To Die' would have held the same sentiments, and I love that. Overall, then, 'For Tomorrow' and 'Waterloo Sunset' are British classics, 'lliey're great because they're understated and don't necessarily bow down to Britain's wealth, greatness and past glories, but celebrate the things that aren't necessarily seen to be that important. In the end, these things generally deemed insignificant are the things that make us British and make Britain what it is. fj pmt6 MISK n §[?0ME] sachinpatel reviews their new album Back in 2004, I walked into HMV and was faced with the choice of buying either The Killers' Hot Fuss or Franz Ferdinand's eponymous debut. Thank goodness I endorsed the latter. While their contemporaries have meandered through the wilderness of Americana before pandering to their love of eighties guilty pleasures, Franz Ferdinand's career to date has been elusive, concise and, most importantly, of a consistently high quality. To those who feel hoodwinked by 2005's sophomore effort. You Could Have It So Much Better, I would proffer that whUe their debut was consider- ably sleeker and tauter, the second release was of compa-rable quality, only brasher, grittier and angrier. It was recorded in a huriy - often seen as a curse - but I would maintain that its more developed song structures showed greater depth to the band's abilities. Step into 2009 and, against a backdrop of mediocre indie and attractive female electro-popsters, how does the Scottish quar tet's latest effort fare? ' Much has ONIGHT: been said of the intervening years, in which the band experimented with cre^{y sjmths, Aftobeat grooves and shiny pop producers, but has any of this actually surfaced in Tonight: Franz Ferdinand? One thing that can safely be said is that Tonight... is a considerably leaner beast than the last; more focused on the dancefloor than society's ills. Tracks like 'No You Girls' and the opener, 'Ulysses', ride on football terrace choruses and hooks while successfiilly navigating the waters of synthesiser experimentation. When the band deal a heavier hand, as in the case of 'What She Came For' and 'Twilight Omens', the songs have a pleasing blend of retro glam and roadhouse eruptions. Treated piano gives way to well-produced rhythm-led stomps that are attractive and memorable, if not instantly history- rewriting. Conceptually, frontman Alex Kapra-nos reckons Tonight is a depiction of a ' typical lads' night out, from the discovery of a new drug (Ulysses), through the naivety of first love (No You Girls), to the euphoria of the dancefloor (Live Alone, which channels Blondie and Abba through a Glaswegian burr). In this respect, the album is bang on the money: far from being a discrete set of radio-ready singles, the group are clever enough to know the benefits of pacing and narrative arc, thus the album unfolds true to Kapranos' cheelgf and insightful lyrics. The climax of this night on the tiles arrives halfway through undoubted centrepiece Lucid Dreams, which, isolated from the context of the album, sounds wildly experimental and strangely lurching. In context, this eight-minute maradion represents the transformation from innocence into hedonism, as a krautrock groove makes way for four minutes of Moroder-esque acid-house freakout. After the peak must come the comedown, surely, and the album delivers here, too. The loping, sideways 'Dream Again' is reminiscent of Tom Waits at his addled best, while closer 'Kath-erine Kiss Me' is a partial reprise of'No You Girls', re-imagined as a acoustic troubadour's farewell. On paper, these varied genres sound wildly disparate, but the cohesion of an album can come from lyrical themes too, as shown in this instance. By alio wing the events of the night to take hold of the album, Kapranos delivers a resounding finger to those who would doubt their breadth in song-¦writing skills. Tonight may lack the instant appeal of the band's debut, and Ae songs may not stand the test of time in the same way, but it offers an intriguing insight into their less obvious influences - a key example being 'Send Him Awa/, which apes Vampire Weekend in its pursuit of African polyrhythms and psych-funk grooves. Do Franz Ferdinand remain relevant in the aftermath of the scene they helped to revive? Not really, but I would argue that that scene has gone stale to such a degree that no band with any artistic integrity would even want to. From here on, the band could go in mjrriad directions, provided they can keep on delivering the hooks and lyrical invention and wit that have kept them a cut above the rest of the pack thus far. Long may Nick McCarthy's Moogs and Korgs fart and groan! T h TT g^rginabutler bets on britaln British music. The Beatles; Pink Floyd; Queen; Coldplay; Radiohead. Iconic bands epitomising British popular music and securing Britain and the United Kingdom as connoisseurs of good music. In the nineties, the British music scene brought us Take That and also the Spice Girls - five larger-than-life personalities keen to espouse "girl power" and excite the nation. Scary, Sporty, Posh, Ginger and Baby enjoyed success as members of what was arguably the best-selling girl group of all time. Now, in the "noughties". Take That have reunited (minus Williams) and experienced similarly colossal success. Popular across Europe, Take That were superstars and they continue to reign supreme after having reunited. The Spice Girls also reunited for a world tour, with tickets selling out in minutes. Cut to a studio at BBC Television Centre, where the ; search is on for a candidate to take us to the Eurovi-sion Song Contest. Despite the vigour of British music, the tide of Eurovision Song Contest Winner manages all too easily to elude the United Kingdom. With only a smattering of past wins (all decades ago - with the likes of Sandy Shaw singing 'Puppet on a String' in 1967; Brotherhood of Man with 'Save your kisses for me' in 1976; Bucks Fizz's'Making your mind up' 1081 and Katrina and the Waves in IQ07I it is time the United Kingdom won Eurovision once again. With such a strong British music scene and bands and solo artists throughout history who-have shaped music around the world, first place at the Eurovision Song Contest should not be beyoiid the United Kingdom's reach. Sir Andrew Lloyd Webber has been drafted in to vwite the song and the public have had the opportunity to choose their favourite act as our entry for Eurovision 2009. The winner of the Saturday night entertainment show 'Euro-vision: Your Country Needs You' and therefore the United Kingdom's entry, is Jade Ewen. Throughout the series, Jade Ewen gave polished performances, with strong vocals and clean choreography. ^ She will sing the song 'My Time', composed % by Andrew Lloyd Webber, with lyrics by Diane Warren. 'The song is aptly named and will represent the United Kingdom's en-} i try well, as last year the UK languished in last place. Can Ewen sing? Yes. Can Ewen dance? Yes. Can Ewen take the United Kingdom all the way to win the Eurovision Song Contest 2009, thereby reflecting the general notable success of British music? Only time will tell. tn FiLM PARTD hollieastman on how sitane meadows found the real British working class Pulzer once said, "Class is the basis of British party politics; all else is embellishment and detail". My life experience on this fair isle has taught me that the influence of class permeates far more than just party politics: it covers nearly all aspects of culture and society. British filmmaking is no exception. Shane Meadows has made a name for himself by making movies that paint an accurate portrayal of British working class life. Considering that for many LSE students the closest glimpse of a working class Brit on the silver screen is Dick Van Dyke's mockney monstrosity in Maiy Poppins, Meadows' cinematic contributions are incredibly valuable. Meadows made his directorial debut in 1999, and after minor successes with Dead Man's Shoes and No Room for Romeo; This is England hit the'back-street silver screens. As is so often the case, unfortunately, critical acclaim wasn't mirrored with any substantial box office earnings. But those who have seen the film cannot deny its power; it is Brit-grit cinema at its finest. This is England is a bucket list must; whether you have been bom and bred in Blighty or are just here for the weather, there is no better source of insight into the realities of 1980s working-class Britain. Set in a grimy northern seaside council estate, the film follows the life of thirteen-year-old Shaun. The ill-dressed teen is taken under the ~ w 1 n g of a skinhead gang who fill the void left behind after ' the death of his father in the Falklands conflict. Striking flashbacks of power suit-clad Thatcher delivering speeches about the strength of empire are employed to chilling effect, appearing to come from a land which time has forgotten. This film is a powerful reminder of pre-New Labour Britain, before Tony, his spin, his M People soundtrack and the promises of prosperity. Things were bleak. The laissez-faire agenda of the new right had left a generation lost: literal abandonment for some, figurative abandonment for others (The Iron Lady had already professed that there was no such thing as society). Meadows illustrates how far-right extremism offered a stabilising force in many of the skinhead's lives. He doesn't romanticise the working class experience, but shows it honestly; Meadows' dictatorship is so effective because he has lived it. It is easy for filmmakers to pander to the stereotypical caricatures of British working class angst. In the past that simple recipe mixed a coal miner and a northern accent into a terraced house. Class, after all, is not a universally compre-hendible concept; along with the cuppa, crumpets and emotional vacancy, it is one of the notorious legacies for which the British are most renowned and belittled for. The films of Meadows, however, transcend the often-exercised potential for filmmakers to trivialise the working class and place them in compartments of convention. Meadows rises above; he tells the truth. And at a time when prospects - the economy, graduate employment, and even the weather forecast - are bleak. This is England, though far firom a pick-me-up, is gripping, and heart-wrenchingly so. The scenes of violence and racially-motivated abuse are raw. And in this rawness, exists their honesty. This is real life. This is English cinema. trentmaynard on how gB^ maddin's Winnipeg is also your Winnipeg Winnipeg, Winnipeg, Winnipeg: A city many people outside of Canada have never heard of, and that many Canadians would rather forget. My Winnipeg, director Guy Maddin's cinematic reflection on his hometown, is conscious of this reality, and it seeks to unravel the mystery that has kept him tied to sleepy, snowy Winnipeg all these years. But while recognising the flaws and relative insignificance of the city, it also builds it up as a mystical space: a place of mystery and legend, with powers uniquely its own. By digging deep into the urbanity of his youth, he hopes to discover why Winnipeg has held onto him into adulthood; why he just can't escape and move on. Described as a "surrealist-inflected pseudo-documentary," the film is a mix of poetic urban meanderings, historical reenactments and experimental childhood exploration. In less-skilled hands it would seemingly spiral into a disjointed disaster, but of course it could notbe put into other hands - this is Maddin's Winnipeg, after all. It is a narrative straight out of the vending folds of his mind, telling the tale of a long-term relationship with a city that might be terrible, if he didn't love it so much. And the genius in My Winnipeg is that the film is, in one way or another, about all of our hometowns. This is not just an expose on the world's coldest city, but on the spacial markers we associate with comfort, that we wrap in nostalgia, that - for better or for worse - we shall always call home. My Winnipeg delivers an important message on humanity and urbanity, if you care to look deep enough. People move to the big city - to New York and London, Toronto and Sydney, Berlin and Shanghai - to be cool, interesting, successful. We define ourselves through our ovm personal expressions of urbanity, but we can't deny the fact that the cities and towns of our youth are always with us. They have made us what we are; they are us, and they are ours. And in that truth, Guy Maddin's Winnipeg is also my Vancouver and your Leeds, his Newcastle and her Cincinnati, their Dortmund and Shenzhen. PARTD THEATRE 13 loisjeary thinks theatreland is a wonderland British theatre may not seem as sexy as its celluloid cousin, but the names you have come to recognise from the billboards and Oscar hype are those of directors and writers who are firmly indebted to the quality and reputation of the British stage. The current legacy of British theatre seems to be in training talent which is then seduced by the bright lights of Hollywood. Danny Boyle, director of Slumdog Millionaire and Trainspotting, started his career in theatre, while Frost/Nixon, adapted from the West End play by Pe-ter Morgan, is another Oscar contender. Mike Leigh's approach as a director is rooted in the practice of improvisation, which has been a founding principle of British theatre for many years, and reflecte his own theatrical training and background. Employing the discipline and rigour of improvisation has contributed to the distinctive feel and success of his films including Happy-Go-Luchy, which has earned him yet another Oscar nomination. Theatreland is stiU considered the most important place for an actor to earn their luv-vie stripes. As an actor, Daniel Radcliffe was as wooden as his Nimbus 2000 before he bared all in Equus, after which he was suddenly lauded and exported as one of Britain's acting hopes. The National Theatre's recent production of Alan Bennett's The History Boys raised the profile of m REVIEW: THEPHYSICISTS rajanpatel sees social science in action irt Ise The doctrine of mutually assured destruction may now be merely of historical interest, but global nuclear catastrophe was a palpable threat when Friedrich Durrenmatt wrote The PIg;sicists in 1961. The play - which explores the decision of the physicist Mobius to feign insanity in order to keep his revolutionary, and potentially destructive, discoveries secret -probed the ethical implications of scientists' new status as destroyers of worlds. Cold War physicists were suddenly forced to struggle with the consequences of their single-minded quest for knowledge. Though familiarity with this debate may less ^ en The Physicists' impact upon a modem audience, the play's plot twists and absurdist elements keep it compelling. Mobius' fellow inmates, who claim to be Einstein and Newton, reveal themselves as a number of young actors including James Cor-den, one half of the creative force behind BBC sitcom Gavin & Stacey, and Dominic Cooper, the buff fiance in Mamma Mia'. Despite the obvious allure of film, the story of British theatre is not simply of mass migration from the stage to the screen. This spring will see Patrick Stewart and Ian McKellen abandon their respective stomping grounds of The Starship Enterprise and Middle Earth to take the stage in Beckett's Waiting for Godot. Although they are both experienced and committed stage actors, their return to the West End demonstrates the global appeal of British theatre. And it's not just actors who benefit from the reputation and command of British theatre. If it were left to film, then the only opportunity ordinary folk would get to see the likes of Jude Law in person would be to wait for hours at a premiere, or to stalk him around Primrose Hill. Neither of these are advisable: they have a tendency to lead to hypothermia, arrest or both. But fortu-I nately, as it must for aU 'proper' actors, the time jhas come for Jude to realise that his potential can only truly be fulfilled on the stage. No doubt Jude hopes that his turn as Hamlet this summer will banish all vomit-inducing memories of Aljie j forever. For the rest of us, we can look forward to la couple of hours spent in a nice theatre, staring j at him legitimately, with no risk of a restraining J order, because we have paid for our tickets and ] have as much right to be there as the next drool-I ing no-hoper. So, as you are captivated by the glitz and ] glamour of Hollywood spare a thought for good I old British theatre, stuck back here in the cold,-I trying desperately to wrench Andrew Lloyd [Webber's grasping hands from its throat. After j all, if it were not for the years they spent treading jthe boards, who knows whether our film talent I would have ever been allowed to step foot onto I the red carpet. secret agents attempting to steal his ideas for their governments. All three have murdered their nurses to prevent them discovering the truth. Racked by guilt and unwilling to make his work public, Mobius persuades 'Einstein' and 'Newton' to give up their missions, only to be thwarted by his truly deranged psychiatrist Mathilde von Zahnd.' The play ends with the physicists locked in the asylum as von Zahnd prepares to achieve total world domination wnth Mobius' ideas. The Physicists aims to satirise the Cold War arms race, the world that Durrenmatt saw as a madhouse and the ridiculous espionage efforts of the power blocs, and this production successfiJly taclded a difficult subject. Directors Balthazar van-Roosendaal and Christina Ammon played up the absurdity of the situation to good effect, creating an appropriately strained and often hys- terical tone. Nima Rahimi, Callum Hassall and Peter Yu - the physicists - and CamUle Deniau as psychiatrist von Zahnd were all convincing, writh Rahimi's twitchy and unsettiing portrayal of the mad Mobius a stand-out. There was fine support from Talal Mahamadi as the bemused police inspector and from Kopal Kapoor as Nurse Stet-tler, Mobius' lover and victim. Choosing to stage The Physicists was a bold move. Durrenmatt saw theatre as a means of involving his audience in active debate - as a consequence, his plays deal with complex issues and may leave viewers more puzzled than entertained. There should be more challenging and intellectually engaging drama at the LSE, and this production was a step in the right direction. \ M SEXftCEHDER PAPTD m stoiy of british femmism Many believe feminism as we know it began with the suffiragettes but, in fact, this is not so. While it would be foolish to attempt to impose a precise starting point, Mary WoUstonecraft's seminal text A Vindication of the Rights of Woman, published in 1792, seems like a good place to start. At the time of WoUstonecraft's writing, women did not exist as 'persons' under the law, but were property of husbands or fathers. Marriage represented a property contract, and married women belonged entirely to their husbands. Indeed, for this reason, women could not be found liable for various criminal acts, as of course they were not responsible for their own actions; their husbands were. Nor could women own property, vote, or claim legal responsibility for their children. Against this backdrop, WoUstone-craft asserted that femininity in all its passivity and submissiveness, was an artificial, constructed concept; a product of a patriarchal culture. Yet it was not until the late twentieth century that such ideas were really given credence. During the 1800s women's relegation to the sphere of home and hearth intensified, just as new opportunities and ideas were opening up for men. Cue the suffi^gettes. The first women's sufirage organisation was formed in 1865 in Manchester, and the story unravelled from there. After much campaigning both by militant suffiagettes and the more passive suffiagists - who were up against such gems from male MPs of the time as: "if a woman could be brought in [to the voting act], so could cows!" - and the interlude of World War I, the vote was finally won in part by 1918, and in flill by 1928. In the intervening seventy years. World War II; the inception of the NHS; housewives; the baby boom; the contrac^nve pUl; relaxation of divorce and abortion laws; Germaine Greer and Susie Or-bach and domestic violence and rape within marriage getting recognised as crimes have all made their mark on women's role in society. So too have Thatcher: the European Union; new reproductive technologies; internet pornography; Princess Diana; lads' mags; Trinny and Susannah and Lucy Pinder. Today, many feel that there is no room, nor any need, for feminism. But this is far from the truth. I am not misled, I am not a whingeing bitch, and I do not hate men. In fact, I intensely dislike confirontation. Though there are a plethora of issues to contend with, I will discuss two. Today, domestic violence (towards women, by men) accounts for nearly a quarter of all recorded violent crime in England and Wales. In fact, one incident of domestic violence is reported to the police every minute. This does not reflect overtly intensive reporting: on average a women is assaulted thirty-five times before her first call to the police. Thus it is less of a surprise that two women a week are killed by their male partners, and indeed, nearly half of all female murder victims are killed by a partner or ex-partner. However, in a survey by Amnesty International, it was found that 74 per cent of men would report a dog being beaten, but only 53 per cent would report domestic violence to the police. One of the worst things about the UK is how it deals with rape. At least 47,000 women are raped evety year in the UK; 5 per cent of women over the age of sixteen have been raped. Yet three out of four local authorities have no support services for rape.. Counter to popular m3fth, the majority of perpetrators are not strangers in dark alleys, but people known to the victim. Though reports of rape to the police have increased in recent decades, research suggests that up to 95 per cent of rapes are never reported. There is little wonder that conviction rates continue to decrease. The national conviction rate for rape is 5.3 per cent,yet in many areas it is much worse; in Gloucestershire the conviction rate is only 0.86 per cent. There is an over-estimation of the scale of false reports by the police (23.8 per cent of rapes are labelled by the police as 'no crime'), prosecutors and public juries. Subjective judgements are frequently made against complainants, though research shows that the rate of false allegations for rape is no higher than for any other offence. It is not often simply a matter of 'your word against his' as many people believe - there is supporting evidence in 86.7 per cent of charged cases of rape. Why so hard to convict? Societal attitudes are not iri favour of the rape survivor: 34 per cent of people in the UK believe a woman is responsible for being raped if she has behaved flirtatiously; 26 per cent if she was wearing revealing clothing; 22 per cent if she has had many sexual partners and 30 per cent if she had been drinking. This is sickening. No-one asks to be raped: if they do, it is by definition not rape. As Germaine Greer said in 1970: "Liberation will not happen unless women agree to be outcasts, eccentrics, perverts or whatever the pow-ers-that-be choose to call them. There have been women in the past far more daring than we would need to be now, who ventured all and gained a little, but survived after all". I do not think that the Ownership of a vagina sanctions rape, beatings and belittling. Women, the war is not yet over. IDENTITY wa3mefan proposes abolishing the monarchy Are you British? Do you believe in slavery? If not, how can you justify supporting the British monarchy? Though the path against monarchy is well-trodden, it's vital to restate the case for why the British monarchy is so very wrong. This will not be another argument about why the royal family is irrelevant and outdated in today's society: anachronistic or not, the existence of the Royal Family is morally repugnant and based on the same system of beliefs that produced slavety and the suffering of millions. The logic of the British monarchy follows the same principle that supported slavety. This argument may seem absurd at first: what similarities exist between royals who get dressed by butlers, and slaves who get sold and beaten into submission? However, both of these positions are constructed from the same social ideology: the idea that human beings are bom into a specific class in society. Clearly, slavery and monarchy produce veiy different results for the people crowned or collared. Nevertheless, these two very different social positions rest on the ends of Ae same moral see-saw. While one is celebrated, the other is condemned: this is the real absurdity. Some may argue that, whether we like it or not, the world is inherently based on a class divide. Universal equality cannot exist. Thus, calling for an end to the British monarchy does not resolve anything. From this perspective, complete equality at birth is impossible and an attempt to achieve such equality may cause more problems than solutions. However, the institutionalisation of an equal society is not the aim of my argument. Equality at birth across the world is an unattainable ideal; however, we should strive to remove a national symbol that supports and legitimises ideas of class superiority and privilege by birthright. Millions of Britons buy into the idea of symbolic monarchy because they find comfort in such traditions. The Royal Famify, they argue, provides stability and a certain continuation within society that helps to forge national unity and a sense of British identity. Believe it or not, I empathise with this argument, and believe traditions are impor- tant for social stability. However, such social traditions could be continued without the perpetuation of a class ideology that officially legitimises the social placement of one person above another solely on the basis of birth and lineage. For examplfe, in Canada, the ceremonial and symbolic functions of the monarch are served by the Governor General. The Governor General of Canada is appointed by the democratically elected Prime Minister. The current Canadian Governor General, Michaelle Jean, is a black woman bom of a Haitian refligee family, v\^o fled to Canada during her childhood. Essentially, if calling for the abolishing of monarchy is too extreme for some, a similar institution could be achieved through a more equitable and democratic selection process. The symbolic representatives of a nation could be chosen by the content of their character instead of the size of the silver spoon they are bom with. This choice exists, and the right dioice would s^qt much more about the British identity than the status quo. PARTD FMD iS sopiilemarment takes a look at little heston's. [len I first heard that Heston Blu-menAal, the triple Michelin starred chef and owner of the Fat Duck at Bray was going to 'revamp' Little Chef for a Channel 4 documentary, I could only do one thing, groan. You really could not get two cu-linay establishments (if you can call Little Chef a culinary establishment) further apart on the gastronomic scale than the aforementioned roadside eatery at places like Popham, Hampshire and Blumenthal's flagship restaurant, renowned for its two-year waiting list. This is the man who brou^t snail porridge to a £129 tasting menu and created nitro-scrambled egg and bacon ice cream, the same man who in nis latest book. In Search of Perfection, provides us with a nine-page recipe for fish pie and who brought the term 'molecular gastronomy' into our living rooms. What on earth possessed him to put one foot, nay, one toe within a millimetre of the Olympic Breakfast? The answer, apparently, is childhood nostalgia. I have to say that my childhood memories of Little Chef road-stops between interminably long and tedious car journeys are far from nostalgic but it would appear that Blu-menthal developed an emotional attachment to the glowing red sign and little white hat at an earfy age. While Blumenthal's attempts to save the chain, which went bankrupt in 2007 only to be bought out by RCapital, maybe just another in a long line of recent documentaries fbllowing the formula of big-chef-goes-to-small-town-and-brings-fresh-organic-in-gredients-to-uneducated-wannabe-cooks-come-restauranteurs, it would seem that Blumenthal's attempts have sat well with the critics. Richard Vines commented that "I have eaten out about 180 times this year and this is the most exciting menu I've seen, combining childhood memories with contemporary tastes." Praise indeed from a hardened food critic. So what exactly has done with Little Chef piping the smell of brewing coffee and the sound of tinkling pots and pans into the ladies and gents? Looking at the menu there is little of discern-able difference. There are still the age old favourites of fish and chips and bangers and mash. Just about the most controversial item on the menu is the Haagen-Daz fondue of small ice-cream balls dipped in chocolate which can be shared between two for a mere £9.95. The real differ ence is in the tasting. Blumenthal has sourced everyAing from the hake in the fish and chips to the batter that surrounds them. The Olym- pic Breakfast now boasts British pork sausages from Finnebrogue Venison Co., black pudding from Ramsay of Carluke Ltd. and unsmoked bacon from Denhay Farms, in West Dorset. Perhaps the biggest difference however is that there are now chefs in Little Chef _ rather than people dressed in chequered trousers who open packets and pop them in the microwave. It would seem that Blumenthal has succeeded in turning around the Popham chain of Little Chef but the real test for "his latest experiment will be whether or not his revamp is rolled out to the other 400 chains dotted along Britain's motorways. I still cannot but groan at the thought of Little Heston's but I kept watching the programme and that was the real point of it all. Big Chef, Little Chef aired at ppm igth-2ist]an on C4, Blumenthal other than rHii-* Heston's Chips easiness - s/ioj tastiness - 9/10 cheapness - 6/io| Stuff that goes in it: i.2kg/2lb 80Z potatoes, such as Charlotte or Belle de Fontena^ 1 litre groundnut oil saltj 1. With the right variety of potato, these chips are crisp on the outside and light and fluffy on the inside. The beauty of this method is I that the potatoes can be cooked twice and kept in the fridge until required. 2. WiA a sharp knife, square the potatoes into rectangles and then cut them into chips about icm thick. The length of the chips is not so | important, but try to keep them the same thickness so that they will cook at the same rate. 3. As soon as the chips are cut, put them into a bowl under cold running water for 10 minutes or so to rinse off some of the starch, then . drain them. 1 4. Next, bring a saucepan of unsalted water to the boil and plunge in the drained potatoes. Bring back to the boil and simmer very gently until the point of a knife wUl penetrate the chips easily. _ | 5. Very carefiilly lift the potatoes out of the water, using a slotted spoon, and place them on a tray. Allow them to steam until they are cool, then place them in the fridge. The chips harden when cold. 1 6. Heat the groundnut oD to a temperature of 130C/250F and plunge the chips in carefully as they may splutter. After a while, they wiU I take on a drier appearance (do not let them brown at all). When this happens, they have finished their second cooking process; drain them, let them cool to room temperature, and put them into the fridge; V^en cold, they are ready for their final cooking. | 7. Heat the groundnut oil to a temperature of 180C/350F. Carefully plunge in the chips and cook until golden brown. "Hiis may take 8-10 minutes. _ _ I 8. Drain and season with salt only; they will take quite a lot. Serve. JOURNEYS PflRTD mimmiiKtumtiim. angelachow is working abroad for the sunmier ? A Tlth so much choice around onwhere to go \/\l and what to do with a few spare months V V in my gap year, I decided not to climb Mount Kilimanjaro, follow the Inca Trail, or do the fashionable in-vogue backpacking type things. Instead, I decided that I wanted to go to summer camp. Camp America is a well-known organisation which recruits young people who are naively willing to work for a pittance in the countryside for a summer in North America. Camp staff are usually just a bunch of students on their summer holiday from university in the States or Britain - so ordinary youthful folks, like you and me. For those of you who do not know what an American summer camp is like, let me attempt to enlighten you. It is a longstanding tradition that during each summer, children from all over the US are shipped off to a camp so their parents can have a holiday and go on a cruise by themselves. The conventional view of camp is a vast woody area with a lake or two, a campfire, lots of wooden cabins and innumerable children running around screaming all day. If you've seen The Parent Trap or Camp Rock, then you'll have a fairly good idea of what I'm talking about. If you've ever been to one, you'll know there's no other experience like it- There are also a lot of variations of camp -Ben Stiller went to 'fat camp' in Heavyweights, the gang reminisced about 'band camp' in American Pie, the Addams Family kids were sent to'brat camp'and the list goes on. It's basically ten weeks of fun for the 'happy campers' where they escape supervision of the parents and swap it for the overlooking of 'all-knowing' twenty-year old camp leaders, affectionately known as counsellors. So, with the summer in sight I was all packed up for the next two and half months with shorts and t-shirts ready for my adventure at Camp Pinewood, a highly stereotype-fitting 'brat camp' fiill of rich kids and thirteen-year old wannabe Paris Hil-tons in North Carolina. As I left home, I had no idea what to expect, and little did 1 know that it was going to be one of the >.. * most stressfiil and traumatic experienc es I've ever had to endure, but also one of the most amazing and fulfilling summers of my life so far. After landing in New York with the other Brits on the way to the same camp and sitting for twenty hours on the Greyhound, we were picked up by a big yellow school bus in Hendersonville, North Carolina and driven to camp. Everything stereotypical you see in films about summer camp is actually kind of accurate. As the bus drove in, a big 'Welcome to Camp Pine-wood' sign greeted me, quickly followed by the massive camp grounds complete with two glistening lakes and rolls of grass surrounded by a forest of trees and hills wedged between the mountains, all smiling back at me in the serene sunshine. Arriving on the first day, it felt like it would be a good summer - lots of long, hot days filled with sunshine, relaxing, and swimming in the lake. But I was wrong. We were immediately sent to work, being made to clean, sweep and dust the cabins, pick up all the rubbish lying about the grounds, and generally make the place sparkle. Parents of campers are instructed to send in their child's belongings along a week early so that the counsellors can spend three days cooped up in the sweaty, overheated cabins folding the clothes and organising the cubby holes of each of the twelve 'dependents' for whom they will be directly responsible as counsellor. Did I also mention that we had to fold and make each of the twelve pris-on-like bunk beds to creaseless perfection and were not allowed to leave for our nights off until we passed a generally rigorous personal tidiness inspection? This was cheap labour at $6go pocket money for the flUl ten weeks of our labour - little pay for such demanding work. But it got even worse when the moment finally arrived and the ca:mpers appeared. Imagine the most spoilt kid you know, who gets catered to by mum and dad at every whim, and for whom money is no object. Much like most of the fifteen-year-olds who appear on " My Super Sweet Sixteen on MTV. Now multiply that image of'brattyness' by a hundred - these kids are something else. They all come from wealthy backgrounds and are used to having maids follow them around, treating them like royalty and never hearing the word 'no.' These campers do not just bring" a backpack with a couple shorts and t-shirts with them, they pack up two log-sized duffel bags full of their Abercrombie & Fitch gear complete with Juicy Couture flip flops and D&G bug shades. And not only do they bring more than they can possibly wear so that they don't need to wash their clothes while at camp, they are sent packages from home every week fiill of candy, toys and other goodies surplus to most people's everyday needs. One scene which is forever ingrained in my brain is of a camper who got a Tiffany & Co bracelet sent to her in the post; she took one look at before screaming, "Eww, I hate it" and promptly flinging it out of her hands onto the floor and swiftly walked off. I found this obscenely offensive, and a little bit disturbing. But don't get me wrong, there are also many upsides to camp as well. The pros of working at camp definitely outweigh the cons of back-chatting brats, immeasurable mosquito bites and backbreaking physical toil. We sang songs, made water bombs, water-skied and played sports all day in the ioo°F sunshine and perfect blue skies. And all of this is done within the warmly protective confines of the 'camp bubble' where you forget all your cares in the world, and you suspend your real life to do nothing but have fun for a few weeks. There's no homework, no coursework and no exams. You have a structured schedule, you have a clear purpose and you have a home. Meals are cooked foryou with an exciting array of typical American, super-unhealthy and calorific foods; Sloppv loes, tacos, comdogs, chips, chicken fingers, grilled cheese sandwiches and the . like. Field trips were always good too. The joys of continuous chanting of absurd songs on a school bus whilst driving to many a theme park, arcade centre, zoo . and ice cream parlour will forever haunt ! me in my sleep. I do not feel that any words can really do justice to explaining the endless new and exciting opportunities you are exposed to at camp so I won't really attempt to. All I can say is that they are immeasurable. As much as it sounds like a prepared answer to a competency question for a job interview, I learned more in those ten weeks away from home than I have ever done in ten years in a classroom. The feeling of responsibility doesn't hit you until you see the panicked faces of the parents when they drop their kid off and meet you for the first time -you're a total stranger, yet they are handing over their most treasured possession and putting all their faith in you that their child wiU come back in one piece. It's kind of a big deal. So my conclusion of my time at camp is that it's pretty hard work with not much appreciation and rubbish pay: it's not something to be entered into lightly. But, really, you get as much out of the camp being a counsellor than being a camper; you make kindred friendships with the other members of staff after bonding over the hell and misery of being one, and, believe it or not, you end up bawling your eyes out and clinging to your favourite campers while the bus drives their them off home at the end of the summer. Your journey from being dumped in an alien environment to making it your home is one which wiU stay with you, if hot forever, for a very long time. The only slight drawback is that you definitely experience a severe case of'post camp blues': I was extremely homesick for one and a half weeks whilst at camp, but I've been 'campsick' for about one and a half years since coming home, and nostalgia hits me every time I see or hear the word 'camp'. I