Congregation forced to debate investments
A petition of Oxford fellows will force the University’s highest legislative body to debate its controversial investment policy in an ambitious campaign spearheaded by students. In the first attempt to gather support among fellows for the Socially Responsible Investment Campaign, students gathered the signatures of 37 dons, almost double the amount needed for Congregation to be called.
Congregation, the gathering of Oxford academics that holds power of veto over the majority of University issues, will discuss the ethics of the University’s investment policy on Tuesday of 6th Week after talks about student concerns were controversially discussed in a closed sessions of University council, without consultation with students.
SRI Campaign approached around 50 fellows, presenting their proposals for an ethical investment policy and requesting their support for a meeting of Congregation. 20 signatures are needed to instigate a meeting of Congregation.
In the first instance of a student campaign forcing a meeting of Congregation since the 2004 debate surrounding tuition fees, it will be argued that the University’s current accordance with the Good Corporation Charter fails to prevent investment in the arms and tobacco trades. OUSU President Emma Norris and the SRI Campaign Co-Chair Richard Ollerhead have criticised the Charter for not protecting against companies which bring about human rights abuses.
They argue that the University should implement clearer guidelines for investments, rather than divesting from any company in particular. Ollerhead said, “We need to think about the implications of what’s going on, and that’s something that’s just not happening at all. There needs to be a discussion about it, it’s not flag-waving about one company. It’s not emotive in that way, but a rational argument.
Norris and Ollerhead also accused Oxford of failing to achieve the same progress in implementing ethical investment practices as other British universities, citing St Andrew’s, Edinburgh, SOAS and the East Anglia, as well as American institutions which introduced ethical investment in the 1970s. In his termly Question Time, Vice Chancellor John Hood refuted such comparisons with other universities.
“I’d encourage colleagues in the university and student members to read the guidelines that are used in other institutions, because to say Edinburgh, for example, has adopted socially responsible investment practices will mean different things to different people.” He added, “I understand, only too well, that this issue is one of concern, not only to students but with senior members of the University as well.
Norris said, “The stupid thing is that the Good Companies Charter doesn’t claim to be concerned with ethical investment. So the idea that the University is selling it like that is slightly ridiculous.” The Charter does not protect against third-party victims.
Norris argues that this could lead to the University indirectly funding human rights abuses “It wouldn’t matter if a company was producing landmines that were killing children all over the world, because they’re the third party and they don’t matter under the Good Corporations Charter.” In Hilary Term, Oxford University was accused of neglecting the views of 4,000 students who signed a petition in favour of a university-wide ethical investment policy.
The University Council in Week Five of Hilary Term was criticised for excluding its talks on SRI from the Joint Consultative Committee portion of the meeting, in which student representatives are given the opportunity to raise concerns with University delegates. Almost 100 students demonstrated outside Oxford University Press, where council was held, to voice their anger at the perceived disregard of their views.
First year Historian Hannah Schling, who attended the protest outside OUP, said, “I don’t want my education to be funded through a trade which inevitably causes death.” “Oxford University seems to be placing itself in a terrible position. I think it’s undermining its fundamental principles, in providing education for people here but putting money into a trade which fuels turmoil abroad.
A spokeswoman from Oxford University said, “Obviously there is an ongoing discussion about the topic, and Congregation - the ultimate authority - will be considering what the University’s position should be.”
11th May 2006