Minutes of Balliol JCR's General Meeting 1st Week Hilary Term 2022

Minutes of Balliol JCR’s General Meeting 1st Week Hilary Term 2022

Sunday January 23rd

1. Introduction to the Welfare Review

Introduction

Maureen Freed, who will be conducting the welfare review, noted that this welfare review would differ a bit from an ordinary one in the sense that a regular welfare review will often just start by looking at how everything looks on paper/written policy documents and then looking at those in the context of welfare whereas this one will be more oriented towards collecting direct experiences, at first.

Maureen also noted that there was an appetite to get to grip with the real issues. She explained that this would entail getting the best understanding possible of the good and the bad experiences people might have had with welfare (at this initial stage). The review will not start by looking at how things are on paper but rather will focus on welfare in practise (i.e. people’s direct experiences).

She, furthermore, explained that it is important to listen to direct experiences and what they are as well as thoughts/opinions on welfare provision more generally. She seeks to “gather lots of different stories”, including both positive and negative experiences. It is important to also get a sense of what is working already, and thus it is important to also gather positive experiences. Maureen mentioned that it is easier to get people to change things and listen if positive experiences are also acknowledged.

Maureen would like to represent the whole range of experiences, both negative and positive. It was also noted that there have been long-standing issues (with welfare provision) that would have merited discussion, regardless of what spurred this review. Maureen said that she felt there is now a readiness to listen, and that everything should be brought forth.

The Process

Maureen outlined how the first phase would be a listening and learning phase where as much information as possible will be gathered about people’s experiences. Maureen will then relay those concerns that emerge. She will also relay what is working well/positive direct experiences.

Then, there will be more data gathering of a different kind and lots of looking at organisation charts and other documents (the Welfare Working Party will drive that part of the process).

There is a commitment to confidentiality (meaning that concerns/shared feedback will be non- identifiable for all, including both staff and students). There will be a high enough level of abstraction in order to make sure that people’s anonymity and confidentiality are protected while also allowing for it to be specific enough to be helpful.

Maureen’s Background

Maureen gave a short introduction to her background. She has spent a lot of time in university environments and been around the university for over 20 years. She has previously been a Mckinsey consultant.

Moreover, Maureen noted that while she could not guarantee any specific outcomes, she would not have agreed to do the review if she did not think there was a commitment to make real changes.

Questions

Madeleine asked how the trends in welfare provision has changed over the last 30 years (specifically relating to the role of chaplains in it).

Maureen replied that historically, welfare at Oxford had been thought about using the language of the family, and that a chaplain would often act in many roles. However, increasingly the trend has been towards greater professionalisation of welfare provision.

Fionn asked how much alumni will be involved in the review process.

Maureen replied that alumni would be welcome to participate, and that there is no such thing as too much feedback. However, there is no formal plan to engage alumni.

Max asked who Maureen would pass the report on to.

Maureen replied that she would report to the Welfare Working Party. She furthermore stated that she was still in the process of learning about Balliol as an organisation (e.g. how decisions are made and so on).

Madeleine asked how the long timeline would be addressed in relation to those at Balliol graduating at the end of Trinity and how the gap in welfare provision at the moment would be handled.

Maureen replied that there is an awareness that it is urgent to get support in place and that Frances Wright is focused on getting the welfare provision in place that is needed at the moment.

Sian, the President, noted that if anyone has anyone pressing concerns, they are welcome to speak to committee, especially the Dr. WHOs. Polly, the Vice-President (Administrative) stated that Balliol has gotten a new counsellor.

Shreya asked about the ambiguity that has existed where it has been unclear how much welfare provision should be undertaken by college and how much should be undertaken by the central university.

Maureen replied that, historically, there has been a sense that all welfare should be delivered in college, but that over time there has been a recognition that it can be good to have some centralised welfare provision as well (and that it can sometimes be of benefit to receive welfare support outside a college setting). However, it is also the case that college has the residual responsibility for welfare provision.

Madeleine asked whether there will be overlap between Maureen’s investigation and the QC Review.

Maureen replied that her review and the QC investigation are distinct.

Lastly, Maureen wished to acknowledge that it has been a tough time for many students, but that she feels hopeful that good will come of the process.

2. First GM Motion

Callum (the proposer of the motion) could not make it to the meeting, so Polly, Vice-President, spoke in his place. She briefly outlined the reasons for the motion (reimbursement for items brought for pantry). The floor was opened to points of information and points of debate, of which there were none.

The motion was duly passed.

3. Second GM Motion

Maisie spoke briefly about the motion, the purpose of which is to donate 200 pounds to the Pink Week Initiative for fundraising and events. This will be held in 3rd week of Hilary term. It is entirely reliant on external funds.

Matt, the Treasurer, asked a factual question. Namely, whether the charities being donated to are UK registered.

Maisie replied that she thought they are, and Matt stated that he would look into it. The motion was amended to reflect the fact that it is only if the charities are UK registered that the money will be donated (if the motion is passed). This is for constitutional reasons.

Georgie, the Charities & RAG Officer, asked whether the money would come from the JCR fund. She also enquired as to whether there is a reason for 200 pounds being donated and not more.

Matt, the Treasurer, replied that you cannot constitutionally donate more than this amount, and that yes, the money would come from the JCR fund.

The motion was duly passed.