2018 General Meeting

Date: Sunday 1st week, Hilary 2018 (2018-01-14)

Agenda

1. Matters arising

2. Amendments to the Governing Documents

• i) Drama Equalities Officers (Juliet)
• ii) Pantry Emergency Sub-Committee (Thomas)
• iii) Nestlé boycott amendment (Thomas)
• iv) Giving out free drinks at bops (Thomas)

3. Motions relating to financial matters

4. Any other motions

• i) Renaming the college’s annual Christmas Dinner (Ilya)

5. Appendices

-------------

a) Matters arising

b) Amendments to the Governing Documents 

i) Drama Equalities Officers (Juliet) -  Motion Passes (with amendments to Appendix)

This JCR notes

1. That drama is very strong within Balliol, being the college with the only student run theatre

2. That non-committee officers are the individuals who chose the term card for the Pilch studio

3. That within drama across the university there is an issue of equality and representation for all minority groups

This JCR believes

1. That drama in Oxford is great but can be better and include more diversity

This JCR resolves

1. To create a non-committee role of Drama Equalities Officer, with standing orders as Appendix 1

ii) Pantry Emergency Sub-Committee (Thomas) - Motion Passes with amendments

This JCR notes:

1. The Pantry Emergency Sub-Committee (PESC) is a role extant in the constitution

2. Pantry is no longer suffering from a staffing emergency necessitating an emergency committee

3. That Standing Order V-26.1 (a) currently states that PESC members must "Ensure that their food safety certification is up to date and make appropriate arrangements for its renewal or acquisition with the JCR Office, either directly or through the Foodies, if it is not up to date or non-existent."

4. That the said certification has not been acquired in the past, but the Foodies have been in possession of it

This JCR believes:

1. That PESC has been very helpful to the Foodies

2. That the role of PESC should continue despite the fact that no emergency still exists

3. That PESC is a nice sounding acronym that should be preserved in the face of any possible name change

4. That PESC members should not need food safety certification as the Foodies are fully qualified and train all "back shift" workers - including PESC - appropriately in Health and Safety measures

5. PESC is well placed to fulfil the duties of Foodie should they not fulfil them

This JCR resolves:

1. To change the name of the "Pantry Emergency Sub-Committee" to the "Pantry Extraordinary Sub-Committee" to reflect the fact that Pantry is no longer in emergency

2. To allow PESC to be activated at the complete discretion of the Foodie at any time, with the decision ratified by a committee lunch within two weeks.

3. To alter Standing Order V-26.1 (a) to read "In the case that both foodies do not have an up-to-date food safety certification, to make appropriate arrangements with the JCR Office to acquire one for themselves"

4. To add to the Standing Order V-26.1 the further clause (c), reading "In the case that one of the Foodies cannot fulfil the entirety of their role due to incapacity, removal or resignation, one of the PESC members shall take on the role in an acting capacity in the interim".

Amendments:

1. To rename to “Pantry Sub-Committee”

2. Alter “Resolves 3 to “strike down Standing Order V-26.1 (a)””

3. Amend Resolves 4 to “one of the PESC members may take on their role”

4. Add to Standing orders 7.1 a clause G entailing “the JCR Foodies must check on the training standards of PSC Members.”

iii) Nestlé boycott amendment (Thomas) - Motion Fails

This JCR notes:

1.  A Nestle boycott currently exists in standing policy.

2. Nestle offers a variety of products, from San Pelligrino and various chocolates, to Nescafe and other foodstuffs.

This JCR believes:

1. Nestle has since become far more ethical, supporting a number of charitable causes and changing their supply chains to become less exploitative.

2. That the Nestle boycott prevents access to many delicious nestle products, for little ethical or economic damage to Nestle.

This JCR resolves:

1. To strike down the Nestle boycott from Standing Policy.

2. To allow the foodies discretion to add Nestle products to pantry and the vending machines.

Amendment:

1. To add to 2 “allowing free choice for all products affected.”

2. To mandate the JCR Foodies to provide non-Nesté alternatives to any Nestlé products that Pantry may sell

  iv) Giving out free drinks at bops (Thomas) - Motion Withdrawn

This JCR notes:

1. JCR standing policy currently forbids the giving out of free drinks at bops

This JCR believes:

1. Free drinks at bops are a necessary part of the operation of bops in their current form, with the entertainment and bop help that is available

2. Entz are a responsible role now, sitting on Fexec

This JCR resolves:

1. To strike this part of Standing Policy

2. To give entz discretion (legally) over the giving out of free drinks

c) Motions relating to financial matters d) Any other motions (i) Renaming the college’s annual Christmas Dinner (Ilya) - Motion Fails

This JCR Notes:

1. There are people who view Christmas as a fundamentally Christian holiday

2. As a result, or for other reasons, there are people who do not wish to celebrate Christmas

3. The 2017 Christmas dinner was advertised as: “the best dinner of the year” and a chance to “reflect on the days we've had, and the term we've had.”

This JCR Believes:

1. There is no reason that people who do not wish to celebrate Christmas ought to be excluded from “the best dinner of the year”

2. As a result, the Christmas Dinner ought not be a religious event

3. If the dinner is not a religious event, removing the word “Christmas” from the name will not adversely affect those already attending

4. Changing the name may make people who would otherwise feel discouraged from attending more comfortable with doing so, and signal Balliol’s acceptance and inclusion of people of faiths other than Christianity and non-believers

5. Demand for tickets is high enough that branding is not an issue.

This JCR Resolves:

1. To change the name of the annual “Christmas Dinner” to a faith-neutral name (e.g. “Holiday Dinner”, “End-of-term Dinner”)

e) Appendices Appendix 1:

Part V:

1.1

aa) The Drama Equalities Officer

30. Duties of Drama Equalities Officer

30.1) In addition to other duties imposed by the Constitution and Standing Orders and by the resolutions of the Committee or of General Meetings, the Drama Equalities Officer shall:

a) Assist the rest of committee in the selection of term cards for the Pilch, ensuring that the term card reflects a wide diversity of talent

Amendment:

b) This position can be held by two people.

c) In the event of the position being held by two individuals, at least one holder of this role should be held by a member of the BAME community.

d) To rename the office “The Drama Racial Diversity and Equalities Officer”

------

Minutes

Drama Equalities Officers (Juliet)

Juliet explained the roles of the various drama officers currently in existence and explained that the proposed equalities officers position has been informally around for a couple of years. Juliet said that the benefits of formalising such a role would include ensuring greater equality in selecting people to play parts - a stance drama across the university is keen to encourage - as well as the fact it would mean a larger panel of people in deciding role selection, which would be helpful for a greater range of views and ideas.

Isis asked for clarification on the current role of the welfare subcommittee in ensuring equality in college drama. Juliet explained that the Dr WHO’s only vet the charity musical so there would be no conflict of roles between them and the new proposed role.

Shreya suggested an eligibility criteria was placed on the role to ensure BAME representation - in recognition of the fact that underrepresentation of other minorities in drama such as the LGBTQ+ community is perhaps less of a pressing issue.

With further inputs from Shreya, Simran, Juliet and others, it was decided that in the case of 2 officers in the role at least one should be BAME. A discussion took place over whether a name change to the role would be a good idea to reflect a focus on BAME representation - with an amendment subsequently proposed by Shreya and Simran.

Amendments b, c and d were taken as friendly.

Motion passes with no opposition.

 

Pantry Emergency Sub-Committee (Thomas)

Thomas clarified the current role of the PESC that was introduced in 2015 in the case of staff shortage. He outline why he believed that pantry is no longer in a state of emergency and the fact that it should be renamed to reflect this. He also suggested that members of PESC should be able to replace a Foodie in committee position immediately if necessary as they are well trained.

Alex requested an amendment to remove ‘extraordinary’ in the new name proposed on the grounds it didn’t contribute to the role title in an informative way. Alex also questioned whether a potential health and safety risk was posed by V-26.1 (a) and Resolves 3 to which amendment b was proposed.

Ellen proposed amendment c.

Leah proposed amendment d.

Motion passes with no opposition

 

Nestlé boycott amendment (Thomas)

Thomas proposed that reform should be made to the current Nestle boycott in existence in Standing Policy. Thomas emphasised the variety of products Nestle produces that could be sold in college. The case was made that Nestle has improved in its attitude to various controversies it has been involved with in the past, and thus should no longer be penalised for its past mistakes.

There were various points of information and comments including from Beth C and Ellen who drew attention to the fact that Nestle has still been involved in recent controversy from forced child labour concerns to extracting water in California without rights.

Isis also drew attention to the reason the boycott was initially put in place - over the baby milk scandal which caused the death and illness of many infants.

Thomas responded to these comments with his view that many of these controversies were in the past and also that many other companies are involved in issues of contention and it is unfair that Nestle has been singled out.

Hannah wanted clarification over what products would be introduced if the boycott was removed. Thomas suggested Nestle cereal, coffee and chocolate bars in particular could be beneficial to pantry/vending machines.

Various points of debate were raised. Beth C argued that the recent new articles have shown Nestle do not have an ongoing commitment to reforming practices.

Ellen also said that the motion couldn’t be justified on the grounds of any ethical improvements - only on the grounds of desiring the nestle products in college.

Isis questioned the benefits of change given the fact that people are able to independent source Nestle products if they so desire and also suggested that the fact pantry is funded should be taken into account when making this decision.

Other views expressed by Becky and a couple of others was that it should be an individuals choice whether or not they boycott Nestle and that introducing nestle products would not take this away - people could choose not to buy the products if they so desired. Thomas added amendment a in response.

It was also highlighted by Felix, Alex, Isis and others that the student body has chosen to take a moral stance in boycotting Nestle and that this should be seen as a positive move reflecting the wider morals of our JCR.

Beth C suggested amendment b which was taken as friendly.

Motion fails.

 

iv) Giving out free drinks at bops (Thomas)

Thomas proposed that Entz should be given discretion over the handing out of free drinks at Bops - for instance in reward for people who help with Bop preparation.

Greg, supported by Mia, made a POI to clarify the fact that only he has the legal discretion to give out drinks.

Motion withdrawn.

 

Renaming the college’s annual Christmas Dinner (Ilya)

Ilya proposed that the current annual Christmas Dinner should be renamed to a more religion neutral name to ensure that no one felt excluded from the event.

Simran expressed his view that he felt it wasn’t currently the case that people felt left out from the event and hence wasn’t worth changing the name for.

Shreya made the point that the Christmas Dinner always precedes the Christmas Bop - both of which are very inclusive to all.

Hannah also expressed that the Christmas dinner tradition at Balliol is important to many individuals who do celebrate Christmas, whilst not being exclusive to anyone.

Safia, Xinyu and Simran also raised concern over potential media interpretation over the changing of the name.

Motion fails.