2015 General Meeting
Date: Sunday 3rd week, Michaelmas 2015 (2015-10-25)Agenda
Questions for Officers
1. Notice given for GM meetings [Charles Bertlin]
The constitution states the following about the notice given for ordinary and annual GM meetings:
3. Notice of Ordinary and Annual General Meetings
3.1. The Committee, or, as the case may be, the relevant Members, shall give at least 7 days notice of any Ordinary or Annual General Meeting to all of the members.
3.2. The notice of any Ordinary or Annual General Meeting shall:
a) state the time and date of the meeting:
b) give the location at which the meeting is to take place;
c) invite Ordinary Members to submit motions for discussion at the meeting.
3.3. At least 3 days before an Ordinary or Annual General Meetings, notice shall be given of:
a) the full agenda of the meeting, including the text of all proposed motions.
b) if a motion to alter the constitution of the JCR is to be considered at the meeting, the text of the proposed alteration;
c) with the notice for the Annual General Meeting, the annual statement of accounts and Committee Officers’ annual reports, or details of where the information may be found on the JCR’s website.
d) with the notice for the final Ordinary General Meeting of an Academic Term, a request for nominations for charities which shall receive donations.
3.4. The proceedings of any General Meeting shall not be invalidated because a member who was entitled to receive notice of the meeting did not receive it because of accidental omission by the JCR.
3.5. Motions submitted less than 3 days before an Ordinary or Annual General Meeting may be accepted at the discretion of the Chair.
I received the agenda for this week’s GM at 5.05pm on Saturday, which is clearly within the three-day period specified above. In fact, the deadline for the submission of motions was this week itself within three days before the GM is due to begin. Section 3.4 quoted above seems to imply that if the failure to receive notice were not accidental, the meeting could be invalidated.
It would have been really helpful to have the GM beforehand. First, it would have let me decide whether I thought it necessary discuss issues that might arise with those concerned before the GM; and secondly I’m pretty busy at the moment, and cannot know without the agenda whether or not I would be interested in cycling into college from Cowley in order to show up.
I do understand that some of this week’s motions need to be discussed in order to have an effect on the forthcoming elections, and therefore accept that some motions may have been submitted after the deadline. This is allowed under the constitution, but again it would have been helpful to have simply a point on the agenda if it were expected that some motions would arrive late, and for the rest of the agenda to be circulated. It is also possible to use an Emergency GM to discuss urgent matters.
The constitution could be more rigid about the notice given to the JCR, and I would be happy to work with you to bring a motion that adds more weight to the submission of motions (and the registering of interest in bringing a motion that has not yet been finalised) by the deadline.
In sum, in the present state of the constitution, the notice we have been given is unconstitutional and opaque. Is there a reason why this has occurred this week, and can you assure us that it will not happen again?
a) Matters Arising
1. Online voting [Molly Rogers]
This JCR Notes:
1. The current system of voting is old fashioned and time consuming.
2. The current system of voting requires that anyone who wants to vote in the election must be able to access the JCR
3. Many, if not the majority of other colleges already use online voting.
4. OUSU have a subscription to Mi-Voice online voting software which we can use for free.
This JCR Believes
1. Every member of the JCR deserves to be able to vote in JCR elections.
2. While physical access to the JCR is passable, there may still be students who cannot access the JCR due to psychological reasons such as anxiety or social phobia.
3. Online voting software will increase the ease with which the votes are counted, reducing workload for members of the committee and producing faster results.
This JCR Resolves
1. To take advantage of the new online voting software offered by OUSU and put it into place before the end of Michaelmas term 2015, and to amend the Constitution accordingly.
b) Passage of Motions without discussion
The list of motions will be read out. Those motions that do not concern amendments to the Constitution or the passing of money may be passed without discussion, if there are no objections and no requests to hear more about the motion.
c) Amendments to the Constitution
2. Removal of the position of JCR D&M officers [Jack Wheatley & Florence Hardy] - Falls
This JCR notes:
-
D&M is a committee position held by up to two people
-
D&M doesn’t do very much (last term we did nothing but screw something in)
-
There are 34 people on the current committee
-
D&M does not have a mandate
-
D&M do not own a hammer
-
D&M don’t even have a JCR office key, so don’t have regular access to the tools
-
D&M traditionally are in charge of the Balliol Fresher’s Fair
-
This year, that role was taken over by the Sports Reps
-
The duties of D&M in the standing orders are: “In addition to other duties imposed by the Constitution and Standing Orders and by the resolutions of the Committee or of General Meetings, the Design and Maintenance Officer shall maintain all JCR administered fittings and furniture.”
-
D&M usually ask the college maintenance department to
-
Anyone can ask the college maintenance department to fix things for them
-
D&M’s only other order is to be members of the Health and Safety Subcommittee
This JCR believes:
-
Committee positions that do not fulfil a useful purpose should not be positions
-
Anybody could do what the D&M officers do
-
D&M does not fulfil a useful purpose
-
Any maintenance and repairs to JCR property can be made by the college maintenance team
This JCR resolves:
-
At the end of the term of the current D&M officers, to remove the position from the JCR
Amendment 1 (Jack): Friendly
To add to resolves 1:
...and to amend the JCR constitution accordingly.
3. Sports Rep. motion [Charlotte Suttle, Alice Farrell and Ben Simon] - Passes
This JCR notes:
1. The Sports Reps. are responsible for ensuring that students have access to good sporting facilities within College
2. This includes promoting sport within Balliol and representing the JCR to College in the acquisition of funds for sport
3. Sports in Balliol are played by people of all genders on both mixed and single gender teams
4. Although lack of institutional memory makes it difficult to provide exact details, there has not been a sports rep. who does not identify as male for at least the last four years
5. Sports Reps. are not currently members of the JCR Committee
This JCR believes:
1. Sport is a significant part of many JCR members’ experiences of their time at Balliol and should be treated as such
2. The Sports reps. play a crucial role in ensuring that sport remains a service provided for all members of the JCR
3. Sports Reps. would be better able to access JCR funds as well as represent the JCR to College if they were on JCR Committee
4. Due to the way in which sport in Balliol is currently organised, with mixed and single gender teams, Sports Reps. would best represent JCR sport if they were in a team who self-identify as different genders
This JCR resolves:
1. Make the Sports Reps. members of JCR Committee - Passes
2. Amend the constitution such that it states that this position must be held by a pair of individuals who self-identify as different genders - Passes
3. Mandate the Sports Reps. and treasurer to review the status of Sports Reps. not currently having a budget and how best JCR funds can be used towards provision of sport in future - Passes
Amendment 1 (Aisha Simon) - Passes
Add resolves 4:
-
To amend the JCR Constitution in accordance with the above
d) Amendments to Standing Orders
There are no amendments to Standing Orders.
e) Amendments to Standing Policy
There are no amendments to Standing Policy.
f) Main Agenda
4. Reimburse prescription charges [Caitlin Tickell]
This JCR notes:
1. That prescription charges in England are currently set at £8.20.
2. That the majority of students are over 18 and therefore not eligible for free prescriptions unless on the NHS low income scheme.
3. That although students may be eligible for help with healthcare costs through the NHS Low Income Scheme (LIS), the complex application process is a barrier for disabled students particularly during high-stress Oxford terms.
4. That Prescription Prepayment Certificates (PPCs) can reduce prescription charge costs but still represent an often impossible financial burden.
5. That £1.50 is roughly estimated to enable the JCR to reimburse one prescription per day in term time.
This JCR believes:
1. That prescription charges often force students to choose between medication and other living costs and are therefore a barrier to healthcare.
2. That we cannot allow disabled students to face unfair additional charges for basic necessities.
3. That disabled students face unique and under-acknowledged challenges, including hidden costs that accompany being disabled at university, and that we stand in solidarity with them.
This JCR resolves:
1. To mandate the Disabled Students’ Officer and/or Drs Who to reimburse prescription charges and prescription prepayment certificates for all members of the JCR, commencing HT16.
2. To mandate the Disabled Students’ Officer to make information about the NHS Low Income Scheme (LIS) available and to help students who may wish to apply or to refer them to the Welfare Advisor.
3. To create a compulsory termly levy of £1.50 commencing in HT16 to equalise the cost of prescriptions for all students, significantly reducing the burden on disabled students whose costs exceed the average.
4. To mandate the then-treasurer and then-DSO to review the use of this levy after a year and to report back to the JCR with comments and recommendations (if any).
5. Discussion of OUSU’s student experiences document [Jessica Poole] - Passes
This JCR notes:
1. That OUSU are creating a document to provide to an independent education quality assurance body about the experiences of students at the University of Oxford.
This JCR believes:
1. That it is important that the document receives input from as many colleges as possible in order to be representative of the majority of student experiences.
This JCR resolves:
1. To listen to a brief summary of the document, and to have a short discussion about its content.
Amendment 1 (Duncan): Friendly
Strikes resolves 1, Add resolves:
- That it agrees with all the points in the document
6. Rose Hill Fund Motion [John Clark-Maxwell]
This JCR notes:
-
We have a fund to reimburse the travel costs of JCR members tutoring at Rose Hill School
-
The fund was started in HT12
-
No current JCR members tutor at Rose Hill school
-
The fund has never been used
-
There is currently £872 in the fund
-
The fund is funded by optional levy
-
The current amount of the optional levy is £0.01
This JCR believes:
-
We shouldn’t have a fund for a purpose which does not exist
This JCR resolves:
-
To close the fund, and move any remaining money to the JCR reserves
-
To remove the optional levy for the Rose Hill fund
Amendment 1 (John Clark-Maxwell) - passes
Strikes resolves 1
Adds resolves:
- To close the fund, and donate any remaining money to Rose Hill School.
Amendment to Amendment 1 (Xav Greenwood)
Amendment 2 (Xavier Greenwood)
Adds believes:
-
that outreach is as integral an aspect of the JCR as access.
-
that, accordingly, we should support schools in our local community as much as possible.
-
that removing the optional levy with no replacement would for all intents and purposes cut the link with Rose Hill Primary School.
-
that maintaining the link allows for more active involvement in the school in the future.
-
that the library and The Art Centre of Rose Hill Primary School would be the most appropriate sections of the school to which the money within the current fund should be donated.
Furthermore, strikes Resolves 1 and adds resolves:
- To close the fund, and donate the extant money - split equally - to the library and The Art Centre of Rose Hill Primary School.
- To create a new optional levy of £0.01 a term, named 'Rose Hill Library and Art Centre', which will be split equally between the library and The Art Centre of Rose Hill Primary School.
7. Free Education & Living Grants For All [Xavier Cohen]
This JCR notes:
1. That George Osborne has announced plans to scrap maintenance grants for low income students in September 2016
2. That Osborne has also announced that tuition fees will be set to rise above £9000 from 2017-18
3. That the National Campaign Against Fees and Cuts (NCAFC) have called a national demo in London on November 4th against these cuts and for a free education
4. That this demo is being supported by the NUS national executive committee
5. That a full risk assessment of the demonstration is being undertaken by the NUS
6. Last year, OUSU Council voted to support the NUS campaign for free education and put £300 toward the cost of a coach to the national demonstration. It was also passed by fifteen JCRs.
7. This year, OUSU Council passed a condemnation of the plans to scrap maintenance grants
8. Last year, Balliol JCR passed £100 to the cost of the coach, and resolved to support free education as a policy
This JCR believes:
1. That education is a social good
2. That nobody should be denied access to that social good
3. That living in poverty is a direct denial of access to that social good
4. That living grants provide an important way to lift students out of poverty and should be maintained and made available to all students
5. That cuts to these grants will disproportionately affect marginalised groups, in particular students from working class backgrounds and students with disabilities, for whom the grants are a lifeline
6. That free education is a social rather than corporate endeavour
7. That we should resist any attempts to further marketise our education system
This JCR resolves:
1. To put up to £150 toward the cost of the coaches, which are set to be organised by OUSU upon the passing of a similar motion to this one in OUSU
2. To mandate all three Balliol JCR votes in OUSU council to vote for the motion backing and organising coaches for this demonstration
8. Pictures in Hall [Molly Rogers] – Passes unanimously
This JCR Notes:
-
There are several portraits of notable Balliol alumni and historical figures up on the wall of the dining hall.
-
Of these portraits, 23 are of men and only 2 are of women.
-
In 1973, Dr Carol Clark became the first ever female fellow of any ancient Oxford college.
-
Dr Clark was a fellow of Balliol for over 30 years.
This JCR Believes:
-
Hanging portraits in hall is an effective way of acknowledging some of the achievements of Balliol alumni.
-
Women are an important part of Balliol’s past, present and future and we ought to celebrate the involvement of women in Balliol.
-
There should be more portraits of women in hall.
-
By being the first female fellow, Carol Clark played a pioneering role for the inclusion of women both in Balliol and the university as a whole.
-
Carol Clark would be a more than worthy candidate for a portrait on the wall of the dining hall.
This JCR Resolves:
-
To support the addition or replacement of one of the portraits in hall by a portrait of Carol Clark.
-
To mandate the JCR President to communicate to college our support of the addition of Dr Clark’s portrait to those in hall.
Amendment (Darryl): Friendly
Replace resolves 1 with “to support the addition or replacement of one of the portraits of men in hall by a portrait of Carol Clark”
9. Self-defence class [Charlotte Suttle and Kathryn Pritchard] - passes
This JCR notes:
1. Harassment and violence of varying degrees of severity are ongoing problems in Oxford.
2. Self-defence classes may help people to feel empowered or more safe in situations where they may be at risk of harassment or violence.
3. The proposed self-defence classes focus on one’s natural reactions as well as tailoring the classes to each an individual’s specific strengths rather than weaknesses.
4. These sessions aim to be informative and fun: The company teach in an inclusive way that aims to make everyone more confident and empowered. The company is aware of concerns surrounding victim-blaming and will not intend to infer any blame or stigma onto those attending the sessions.
5. Self-defence classes have previously been run successfully for students at Balliol.
6. The JCR has plenty of money for funding such classes (most likely from the general welfare fund)
7. These classes have been highly recommended by Trinity and Mansfield Colleges.
This JCR believes:
1. Everybody has the right to feel safe and at ease while in Oxford.
2. These self-defence classes will provide an opportunity for Balliol JCR members to learn new skills that may have a positive impact on their wellbeing.
This JCR resolves:
1. To give £300 to the women’s officer in order to pay for 4 weeks of self-defence classes to be held in association with St. John’s JCR. The classes will be held at St. Johns in the Kendrew room on Wednesday evenings of weeks 4, 5, 6 and 7 of Michaelmas Term
2. That two of the four classes will be restricted to those who identify partly or wholly as women: this is in order to ensure classes are tailored to focus on the scenarios most commonly faced by women, and in order that the class promotes the correct and safe way for women to confront these situations without causing themselves harm. The other two sessions will be open to all genders and cover a wider range of scenarios.
Amendment 1 (Rachel Harpole): Friendly
Change believes 1 to “Whilst the onus is never on the victim to protect themselves, Everybody has the right to feel safe and at ease while in Oxford. “
10. Reimbursement of the Lindsay [Richard Ware] - passes
This JCR notes:
1. That the Lindsay bar is open
2. That in order to open, the Lindsay bar requires stock to sell
3. That the Lindsay bar had stock for the start of freshers’ week
4. That most of this stock had to be delivered prior to the start of freshers’ week
5. That someone must be present when stock is delivered
6. That the Lindsay Bar has had a new dishwasher and two new fridges installed this term
7. That these pieces of machinery had to be delivered before the start of term
8. That someone had to be present for the delivery and installation of the new machinery
9. That the Lindsay Bar recently began using a new supplier, in order to secure better deals and stave off further price increases
10. That to use this supplier, the Lord Lindsay had to sign a contract with the supply rep before the first order was placed
11. That the supply rep is based in Oxford
12. The the Lord Lindsay live in North Yorkshire
13. That the Lord Lindsay’s arms may be long, but they are not that long
14. That the rest of the Lord Lindsay therefore had to be in Oxford too
15. That the Lord Lindsay took 7 days vacation residence, so that he could meet with reps, place orders, receive orders, receive machinery, make JCR notice boards, have posters printed, fix (ish) broken taps in the bar
16. That these seven days cost £153.16
17. That Lord Lindsay, like every other committee position, is unpaid
18. That Lord Lindsay, like every other committee position, is constitutionally forbidden from being paid to execute their committee obligations
19. That last year’s Lord Lindsay did not take a week’s vacation residence
20. That last year’s Lord Lindsay did not have contracts to sign or new machinery being delivered
21. That the Lord Lindsay does not have to pass spending from the Lindsay Bar bank account through a GM
22. That, given the poor performance of the Lindsay Bar last term, and the cost of new machinery, the Lindsay Bar bank account is now rather low
This JCR Believes:
1. That the taking of vacation residence by the Lord Lindsay was necessary for the bar to open at the start of Freshers’ week
2. That reimbursing the Lord Lindsay would not count as paying him
3. That the Lord Lindsay should not personally have to bear the costs of running the bar
4. That it would be better to reimburse the Lord Lindsay from the JCR bank account
This JCR Resolves:
1. To pass £153.16 to reimburse the Lord Lindsay for his vacation residence, from either General Funds or whichever other account (excluding the Lindsay Bar account) the Treasure deems best.
Amendment 1 (John C-M) - Friendly
Add believes: “The JCR is happy to set a precedent that committee members may occasionally have vac res paying but it wants them to make that clear beforehand at committee lunch”
http://www.ballioljcr.org/sites/default/files/governing_documents/New%20Constitution_0.pdf
Minutes
Question 1. Duncan Shepherd explained that the JCR Constitution asks for an agenda to be sent out three days in advance of a GM. He said that in future, GM agendas will be sent out in the form that it is on Thursday, but we will continue to accept motions to be added to the agenda after this deadline at the discretion of the Chair.
Question 2. John Clark Maxwell asked the Ball President, Abi Williams, if the ball was still happening. Since Abi was not present at the GM, the Ball Secretary Daisy Cutts answered the question. She explained that that college isn't keen on the idea of a ball every year. Therefore, the Ball Committee are currently negotiating with college to try and find an agreement which makes everybody happy. This will hopefully mean holding a ball bi-annually, and holding a different event in years where there isn't a ball scheduled, starting in summer 2016. The Ball Committee will come to a GM later his term and explain exactly what is happening, once we understand fully what college is happy for us to do.
1. Molly Rogers explained that the online voting motion needed a second hearing. Charles Bertlin asked if Molly had done any research on how this had impacted other colleges. Molly said that she had, and that other colleges had not seen significant changes. The motion passed.
2. Jack Wheatley explained why the current D&M officers don’t think that Design and Maintenance should be an office. Alex McKenzie asked when this was last discussed. Colm Britchfield offered the point of information that a similar motion had been brought two years ago, and the position survived. Alex asked if D&M officers had ever designed anything. They said no. Molly asked if the Health and Safety committee would suffer if the D&M officers were removed. Aisha Sion said that she thought the Health and Safety committee would not be affected.
Richard Ware said that there are Design and Maintenance type jobs in college that D&M offices could be doing. He thinks the position is still useful. Flo Hardy said that if the D&M officers were not on Committee they would not be mandated to do anything. Colm said that for the role to work, people would have to run for it seriously. Molly asked why the D&M role has ceased to be useful. Richard said that it would be useful to have someone who has the job to fix things. Daisy Pearson asked if the D&M officers had historically done valuable tasks. Flo said that D&M were responsible for the upkeep of the Norway Room.
John offered the point of debate that the JCR is looking at doing some work over the next few years, and there is scope for improvements that D&M could take a lead on. Jack said that there are no regular tasks for D&M, and having a Committee position that does nothing on a regular basis seems pointless. Molly said that maybe D&M is a role that should tell people where to go with D&M requests, rather than deal with the D&M requests themselves. Flo answered that the D&M officers only ever direct people to one place – the Balliol maintenance team. Daisy P asked if the D&M officers had a budget. John offered the point of information that they do not.
There was a call to move to a vote. Gaetano Iannetta opposed this move to a vote. Henry Wisbey Broom suggested that we should move to a vote because we have so many motions to get through. We moved to a vote. The motion fell.
3. Charlotte Suttle explained that she thought her motion should be taken as one motion, rather than in parts, because setting a precedent of Sports Rep as a role open to pope of all genders might be more successful if Sports Rep was seen as a serious committee role, rather than a role where the main task is to compose funny emails. Alex proposed taking the motion in parts. There was no opposition, so we took the motion in parts. Darryl Braier-Lorimer brought the procedural motion to make this vote a secret ballot. This motion fell.
Rachel Harpole asked what will change if the Sports Reps go onto Committee. Charlotte explained that for budgeting processes it would be a good idea to have the Sports Reps on Committee. Joshua Warwick asked if the Sports Reps have been on Committee before – Charlotte said she didn’t know.
Xavier Greenwood said that he thought Sports Reps should be on Committee. Josh asked what interaction the Sports Reps have with college. Jacob Rabinowitz answered that they have termly meetings with college, and inform college about big events, such as cuppers. John offered the point of information that the money Sports Reps deal with comes from college, not the JCR. Aisha asked if the Sports Reps join the JCR committee, will college be more reluctant to fund sports? John said that he doesn’t envisage the JCR paying for anything more than casual sport.
We voted to pass Resolves 1.
Darryl brought the motion to make this a secret ballot. Matthew Lynch said that this isn’t a sensitive issue. Thomas Posa said that the motion that mandated the Dr WHO’s to be of different genders was a secret ballot. This motion fell.
Oliver Johnson Munday asked when the last female sports rep was. Charlotte said we don’t know. Darryl asked why have women not run for this position in the past. Charlotte said that women did not see women in the sports rep role.
There was a call to move to a vote. Resolves 2 passed.
Resolves 3 and 4 also passed in quick succession, with no opposition.
4. Annie Williamson asked how anonymity will work with the reimbursement scheme. Caitlin Tickell said that a Dr WHO is mandated to be confidential. The system would work like the reimbursement for the contraceptive pill works. Charles asked how many prescriptions we would expect to refund. Caitlin said we can be flexible. Matt asked if college currently provided support for this. Caitlin said no. Xavier Cohen asked about reimbursements of prescriptions during the holidays. Caitlin said that would be fine. Caitlin explained why she wanted to make the levy compulsory not optional – you don’t choose to be ill.
Richard Ware asked how this would work with suspended status students. Duncan said that this would be available to suspended status students. Kardin Somme asked what percentage of people pay the optional sexual health levy. John replied that this is around 80/90%.
Tom said that the process for applying for prescription was easier than it seemed from the motion. Caitlin said that she knows people who would need to fill in this form and can’t. Molly said that the form may be inaccessible. Rachel said that people who don’t buy prescriptions may not realise just how much prescription costs add up, and she thinks the motion is great.
Ellen Ellis said that illness is unpredictable and therefore difficult to budget for. Xav C said that if people agree with the idea of free healthcare for all, regardless of income, they should support this motion.
Liza Hadley said that the form did not require people to disclose their parents income. Caitlin and Molly said this was wrong.
Procedural motion for this to be done by a secret ballot. Oli said this was clearly a sensitive, personal issue. Charlotte said people should be accountable for their opinions. Secret ballot was called. We voted by secret ballot. The motion passed.
5. Jessica Poole explained that OUSU have a document about things students want to change abut Oxford University, according to a survey of Oxford students. Duncan brought an amendment that said that the JCR agrees with the statements in this document and would like to express this support at OUSU. The amendment and the motion both passed.
6. John explained what the Rose Hill Fund was and said that no one has ever requested money from the fund. He explained he wanted discussion on what the JCR does with funds that are no longer used. Alice Farrell said the future Access and Admissions officers may restart the scheme. Annie asked for some information about the school. Robert Walmsley asked if Rose Hill are aware of this fund. Xav G said no. There were no points of debate. John’s amendment passed.
Xav G explained his amendment. He said that he thinks it’s really important to maintain this link to the school. Alex asked if anyone has spoken to Rose Hill School. Xav G said no because it’s the weekend. Alex proposed that Xav G speaks to the school and brings the motion back. This motion will be reheard at the next GM.
7. Xav C outlined his motion. The Government have decided to scrap maintenance grants, and replace them with loans. There is an NUS demonstration in London. There are buses to this demonstration being organised by OUSU. Tom asked how many Balliol students went to the last demonstration about fee education. Richard and Xav said between 5-10. Matt asked how much other JCR’s gave. Xav answered that £150 was given by some other colleges, and the Wadham had given £150.
We moved to a vote and the motion passed.
8. Molly explained who Carol Clark was, and why she thought it was important to add her portraits to the ones in Hall. Charles asked if college are already planning to put up a portrait. Molly explained that college are thinking about it, and this motion would show the JCR’s support. Conor Jordan asked how much weight this will motion will have with college. Molly said she didn’t know – JCR support is worth something, she doesn’t know how much. Matt asked to hear more about Carol Clark – Molly gave this info. Charlotte said that Carol Clark came and spoke at Women’s Dinner quite recently. Meg Peyton Jones asked about other candidates for a hall portrait. Molly said that the JCR could bring amendments suggesting other candidates. Alex asked if we are taking a portrait down to make space for this one, or just adding another portrait to hall. Molly answered that this was a decision for college to make. Darryl brought an amendment, it was taken as friendly. John asked if we are painting a new portrait or using an existing one. Molly said it will be a new one.
The motion passed.
9. Charlotte explained why she thought these classes were important. Darryl asked how many classes there would be and Charlotte answered four. Duncan offered the POI that classes hold 40 people. Tom asked whether Charlotte had an idea of how poplar the classes would be with Balliol students. We had a show of hands for all those who might be interested in attending the classes. This indicated that there is demand in the JCR for these classes.
Rachel offered an amendment, which was taken as friendly, which reworded the motion.
We moved to a vote. The motion passed.
10. Richard explained his motion. There was no opposition to the motion, so the motion passed.