As potential students continue to visit York on open days, they will be casting a critical eye on their surroundings. The state of the accommodation, their chosen course’s syllabus, the number and quality of drinking establishments: these factors will all play a large part in their final choice of where to spend the next three years.

Yet for those prospective students who use wheelchairs and scooters, they will also have to take into account an issue which would never cross the minds of the majority of visitors: the problem of accessibility.

Katie Player is the YUSU Disability and Access Officer and a wheelchair user herself. She explained to me that there is one simple obstacle to someone in a wheelchair. “My friends always say I’m like a dalek,” says Katie, “because the only reason daleks don’t take over the world is because they can’t climb stairs. A step or a curb is the only thing that stops wheelchair users, and it becomes a step on top of a step, which then becomes a staircase.”

At York, it is the job of the Disability Office, including Disability Support Co-ordinator Deb Taylor, to try and reduce the impact of disabilities on the day-to-day lives of students. I asked Taylor what the main aim of the Office was. “The ideal is where every person with access difficulties will be able to get anywhere on campus, but obviously we’re working with what we’ve got. Thankfully we’ve got a campus which, I don’t know whether by luck or by design, happens not to have very many steps.”

It’s not just ramps and automatic doors that the Disability Office works to implement and Taylor has already been in contact with some of next year’s student intake, inviting them to be shown around campus and discuss any special provisions that need to be made. “We show them around the wheelchair accessible rooms we have available because we have many different layouts and we let them make their choice, since different users have different needs.”

One student who has benefited from the help provided by the Office is Francis Boorman. “I found the aid they offered extremely helpful, and they listened specifically to my needs. Within a few days of arriving at university they had fitted a button to my chair so I was able to remotely open doors.”

“My friends say I’m like a dalek as the only reason daleks don’t take over the world is because they can’t climb stairs”

Working with Taylor and the rest of the Disability Office is Russell Bailey, Access Officer for Estates Services, the body that is responsible for the management and the development of the university buildings. He stresses that whilst their emphasis is on making physical changes to the campus as much as possible, time constraints and the nature of some of the buildings means that occasionally this is not possible. “The problem is that we are dealing with a campus that was predominantly built in the 1960s when access issues were not really considered. Therefore we get cases, such as when we are trying to widen a corridor for easier wheelchair access to a seminar room for example, where there are obstacles such as structural beams which we are not able to move.”

Alongside an ongoing campus audit working to a five year plan, students, staff and conference guests can also let Estates know when they have problems with access and generally these are dealt with as a matter of priority. In cases where physical constructions and adjustments are not possible, both Estates and the Disability Office work with the student in question and academic departments in order to provide an alternative whilst maintaining an identical service. “Although we’ve certainly got it a bit easier than universities who are dealing with huge medieval buildings, with some of the original colleges it is difficult to make it all accessible,” says Taylor. “When it is difficult to provide full accessibility in a building, we aim to provide the same facilities elsewhere to the same degree.

“If students can’t get into a particular area for their tutorial because their corridor isn’t big enough, we ask that the tutor relocates to a spare room somewhere else where they can give the tutorial just as easily.”

Talking to scooter user Stewart Aitken about his experiences with access on campus, it became clear just how much one piece of equipment malfunctioning can affect those with mobility problems: “Lifts are perhaps the most contentious problem for me in that when they are broken, I can’t access the rooms they would take me to. However, repairs have been undertaken speedily and I have been kept in the information loop as to progress.”

He also talks to his department about how they can make access easier for him. “The place where I will be studying next year recently implemented fire protection improvements which have made access more difficult, but I have been in consultation with them, and improvements will be made before the start of the new year.”

Time and money restraints aside, the general view is both positive about the work already done on campus to help disabled students and hopeful for the future. Yet, as I was to find out, York city centre was a different story. In an attempt to gain a small glimpse into the difficulties posed by environments built around the needs of able-bodied people to those with mobility issues, I decided to spend some time around York in a wheelchair myself. Katie was encouraging: “I think it’s a really good idea, but you can’t cheat. And you will want to cheat. I’m sure you’ll find it easy. Well, maybe…”

The one thing that hit me was the way in which people simply failed to take any notice of my ‘needs’. There were plenty of what Katie calls “sympathy stares”, yet on a busy Friday the crowds didn’t seem to realise that I needed more space than they did. If people got out the way at all, they did so only at the last moment. People walking towards me gave me only the narrowest gap with which to pass them, meaning I was almost forced into the road on a number of occasions.

It wasn’t only about giving me space; people also interacted with me differently. Katie had warned me that “when shopping with someone, you’ll find shop assistants don’t talk to you, they talk to the person you’re with. Even when I’ve directly asked them a question some people will talk to the person I’m with.” I found this out for myself when taking the FTR bus back to campus. Although clearly displaying I was capable of speech when being helped on by a conductor, he chose to bypass me and address my companion as to where we were getting off. It was a very strange experience, as if my companion was somehow a ‘real’ grown-up who was there in order to be responsible for my well-being.

In terms of access to shops, there was a wide variety in quality. Some, such as Marks and Spencer, had nice wide passageways which were easy to traverse. Others, such as Jack Wills, had that dreaded step. In 2004, changes were made to the Disability Discrimination Act that required “businesses and other organisations to take reasonable steps to tackle physical features that act as a barrier to disabled people who want to access their services.” Taylor is “amused” by its effects on York city centre. “I found suddenly there were cases such as doorbells attached to gates outside for wheelchair access, but the bell would be quite low down or you wouldn’t be able to reach it if you were in a wheelchair. We have lots of places where they will pull out their new piece of technology, but there’s a difference between it seeming to be accessible and it actually working. These are places that will have made the effort but possibly need to think about it a little more.”

“Everything, including this campus, is designed on the assumption that people have the ability to get around easily”

Katie agrees: “In general clubs are a nightmare. As a result I tend to go to places that I know, or I pop my chair outside and my friends carry me around which is fine as I’m light and chuckable. You find the places that are good, the places which are bad, and stick to it.”

A prime, and rather amusing, example is Toffs. “Their disabled access takes you into the indie room where there is a small area around two square metres, and then steps. So you are able to get into those two square metres but nowhere else!” Through her role in the Students’ Union, she is currently in discussion with Toffs, in the hope that their planned construction for a smoking area will mean that wheelchair users will have a greater freedom. “I’m going to go in there and tell them where I think ramps should go, and they might turn around and say no but I’m going to give it a try anyway.” Unsurprisingly Ziggy’s is “awful”, but Evil Eye, Dusk and HaHa! all get the thumbs up, mainly because of the size of their disabled toilets.

Neil Barnes was YUSU Academic and Welfare Officer from 2005-2006, and I asked him whether he thought an attitude change was needed. “From what I saw, people need to move away from thinking they need to improve access because of legality or ‘duty’, and move towards wanting to improve access because they believe disabled students are equal partners in society.”

He picked out an example from his time as part of the Students’ Union. “When James Alexander was President, he went all-out to organise a Disability Awareness training session for SU officers and embarrassed those who didn’t go by publicly naming and shaming them. It was an excellent session and I felt it really changed people’s views. However, when I suggested something similar to my fellow officers last year, one response was, ‘Oh God, not that again, what a waste of time.’ So you see how some people can’t really be bothered with access for disabled students—it’s like a necessary evil for them.”

I asked Stewart how he felt the attitude of his fellow students was towards wheelchair and scooter users. “Students are in general very helpful, however there are some issues. For example, sometimes students will meet friends and stop and chat in the most awkward places. They will see you coming and ignore you until you ask them to move.

It is these examples of people just not thinking, rather than deliberately restricting wheelchair access, that Taylor believes show it is vital to raise awareness. “One of the examples that I’ve enjoyed using in the past is the rule that you are not allowed to ride bikes on the covered walkways. Many people think, ‘What’s the point of that?’ and do it anyway. The problem is people on bikes tend to assume people will move out the way, yet for a variety of reasons the person in front of you may not be aware of your presence. There was once a nasty accident where a deaf student hadn’t heard a cyclist’s bell, and they ended up getting tangled.”

It’s also important for her that people aren’t afraid to ask their fellow students if they think they may need help, but are unsure about what they can do: “Don’t automatically make assumptions that people see things, do things, hear things, move, and walk in the same way as you do. If you have a student with a visual or hearing impairment in your seminar group, don’t be afraid of saying the wrong thing; ask the student themselves.”
For Katie, the importance is mainly for people to just have it in their minds. “It doesn’t have to be a conscious thing so that people are panicking, thinking: ‘Oh God, we must all get ramps’. It’d just be good if people reading this think that one day, if they opened a shop or restaurant, they may get a ramp or a big toilet. People need to realise that making provisions isn’t as hard as it seems.”

Taylor believes that it is society’s responsibility to work towards a different attitude to access. “Everything, including this campus, is primarily designed on the assumption that people have the ability to get around, and to get around very easily. In fact, any ability that any of us have is only temporary. As we get older our mobility gets less, and you’ll find the slopes work for older people too and so on. It’s not just helping the disabled; there are things that can be done that can make life easier for everybody and it is these kinds of things that we’re steadily trying to get implanted. With the University, we’re trying to move away from ‘Oh, look, that person is disabled and we’re having to do things for them’. If the little things are thought about, it means that disability doesn’t become as much of an issue.”

Speaking during a visit to the campus on June 11, Dr John Sentamu said, “If a university has very clear ethical principles, which I would have thought York would have, my worry would be if that academic institution was hindered in its research and its criticism.

“What is critical is not necessarily just the holding of shares, but if the holding of shares prevents the University from being open to the truth.”

In May, Nouse uncovered evidence that the University holds indirect shares in Petrochina, a major Chinese oil firm that has been labelled as complicit in the Sudanese genocide. Kate Evans, chair of the People and Planet Society, condemned the investments, saying, “I’d like to think the average student would be shocked to discover our tuition fees are indirectly funding genocide.”

The investigation also discovered the University still holds 147,100 shares in the arms company BAE Systems, an investment first discovered by Nouse in October 2005.

YUSU Environment Officer Tom Langley said, “We disagree with the Archbishop, in that the problem with the investments isn’t just the effect it has inside the University. The University’s investments will have a direct impact on people’s lives and we need to make sure the investments go in line with their ethical policy.

“The University does have strong ethical principles, but previously it hasn’t been impossible to apply these to investments. Now the University is starting to take this account and they really are taking it seriously.”

Reverend Rory Dagliesh, the University of York Methodist Chaplian, said, “I don’t personally believe that investment in weapons manufacturing is ever justifiable.

“Our choices impact on the lives of others and we have a responsibility to make choices in all areas of life that make the greatest positive contribution. It may be well nigh impossible to comb through every investment portfolio in a large organisation in search of questionable shareholdings, but in the case of Petrochina and BAE Systems, credible questions from reputable sources have been asked about corruption and complicity in real human suffering, and other institutions and organizations have already made the choice to disinvest from them.”

During his visit, Dr Sentamu was shown around the politics department and praised it for its post-war reconstruction research. “I didn’t see anything which would prevent research commenting, even if things are uncomfortable,” he said.

Dr Sentamu also said it was “very worrying” that 49% of foreign students at the University of York feel excluded by British students.

“The presence of international students is very good for the University. There are people who did their masters in the Politics Department here who are now government ministers in other parts of the world, so you’re spreading your internationalism through education.”

The findings came as a result of a survey of international students conducted by Nouse in May. “All students are future leaders, and if you can’t get on at university, then the state of future leadership is very worrying and it becomes very difficult for the future for all of us.” He said it was the duty of students to make sure everyone gets on, adding, “It is an international community and therefore it ought to be wonderful.”

In May, Dr Sentamu took out an advert in local paper The York Press warning voters that apathy could lead York to “sleepwalk into a wall of hate”, a reference to the BNP standing in various wards across the city. He called the result a success. “My message was reminding people that they should go out and vote, and what was interesting is that the voting figures went up by about 18%. If a lot of people don’t go out to vote, then minority parties tend to get in. Larger turnouts are the only answer to minority groups and if apathy comes, then we’re in a mess.”

Dr. Sentamu also talked with Christian students at More House, the Catholic Chaplaincy. Rev Dalgliesh said those students that met the Archbishop found it very rewarding. “Dr. Sentamu was engaging and warm and I liked his forthrightness,” he said.

Dr. Sentamu, who was elected the Church of England’s first black archbishop in 2005, has been a notable figure in politics, serving as advisor to the Stephen Lawrence Judicial Enquiry and Chair of the Damilola Taylor review.

In light of recent debate on multiculturalism, Dr Sentamu has called for the rediscovery of English pride and cultural identity. He also has been a prominent opponent of the Sexual Orientation Regulation. Speaking against the legislation, Dr. Sentamu said the government was seeking to have “consciences surgically removed.”

The policy, released last week, prohibits smoking in all University premises and will come into practice on July 1, the same day that smoking in smoke-free areas is made illegal across England.

The ‘Procedure’ section of the policy states: “The responsibility for implementing this Policy will lie with Heads of Departments and College Provosts.” However, there is no specific advice for how to deal with those that are caught smoking inside.

Commercial Services has also received no instruction from the University for how bar staff is college bars are to proceed when someone is found breaking the ban.

A spokesman for the University confirmed that no specific guidelines would be given to Heads of Departments and College Provosts, saying, “Guidance and advice is available from the Pro Vice-Chancellor for Students and Health and Safety, if required.

“If smoking is taking place in a public area, the senior member of staff has a legal responsibility to deal with it effectively. That does not necessarily mean that the police will be automatically involved, for instance if someone inadvertently lights up and extinguishes the cigarette immediately when warned.”

The policy states: “If members of the community or their guests do not observe the policy then Heads of Departments, College Provosts and the University of York may be exposed to possible legal proceedings.”

Smoking will be permitted in the University grounds, but no one will be able to smoke from windows, on roofs or in doorways. Smoking is also not permitted within two metres of any University building.

YUSU President Rich Croker, who sat on the working group that helped formulate the policy, welcomed the measures. He said, “It ensures the University conform to the national requirements whilst ensuring a clear message is presented to staff and students alike. Considerations were taken in regards to some aspects such as making the campus a smoke-free zone or to build extensions to allow people to smoke near bars, but they were rejected for legitimate reasons which we supported.”

In 2004, Leeds University Union brought in a four-week trial smoking ban in its bars, which was abandoned after sales dropped by over £26,000 in 13 days. Despite this, John Greenwood, head of Commercial Services (which manages the bars), has welcomed the ban as beneficiary for the health of his staff.

He said he will “wait and see” as to whether it will affect their profitability, but added that the recent examples of a smoking ban in Scotland, Ireland and New York had not given him any great cause for worry.

Licensed premises in York have begun to bring in measures for the smoking ban amidst worries the nightlife trade in the city may drop. To hide unsavoury smells such as stale beer and sweat that the smoke had previously covered, Nexus and BPM are set to use industrial air fresheners to pump smells such as strawberry and lemon meringue pie through the bar areas. Toffs is also set to start work on a smoking area, although no concrete details have yet been released.

In June 2004, three University of York students attacked fellow student James Pullen in Vanbrugh Bar during the campus music festival Woodstock. Only a couple of months before, a University of York Students’ Union officer had bottled another student in Ziggy’s and was sentenced to nine months in prison. These two cases precipitated a reaction from the Students’ Union that has been at the root of a souring of relations between the Union and the student newspapers: the Media Charter.

In the three years since both papers have referred to ‘censorship’ from the Union whilst reporting on specific cases, there has been no in-depth public examination of whether, as my predecessor Toby Hall warned, “the nebulous defence of ‘student welfare’ allowed back door censorship of the media”.

The Charter itself addresses numerous clauses between the paper and the Union, many of which are required and mutually accepted by both parties. For example, since the Union have total legal responsibility for anything printed by Nouse and Vision, it is only right that they should check through any content that could be contentious. It is the welfare aspect over which the battle is fought. It states that the Union can prevent an article being published if it puts a student “at specific social, academic, physical or mental risk, as identified by the Academic and Welfare Officer”.

If campus media are to hold the University and Union to account, the media charter needs to be rethought.

This aspect of the charter is constantly implemented on the premise that an individual student’s welfare is more important to protect than that of the student body as a whole. This is typified by the comment made by James Alexander, YUSU President at the time of the charter’s implementation, that he “would be prepared to defend a rapist if they were still a student.” In the cases of the attacks at Woodstock and Ziggy’s, the Union decided the whole of the University population did not deserve to know the identity of potentially dangerous students, even once they had been convicted by the British legal system. That the students were named in the York Press, a paper that is sold by the Union in Your:Shop, was merely another nonsensical aspect of an ill-thought out and damaging piece of legislation.

At the time, there were understandable theories that the Union had rushed through the charter to protect one of their own and in fact couldn’t care less for the greater population. These suspicions still remain, and with good reason. Despite both Nouse and Vision pleading for more time to ascertain their full legal rights, the Charter was forced through and signed within only a few hours of the first group discussion.

Whether or not you believe James Alexander’s assurance that there were no ulterior motives for the charter, it clearly allows such a case to occur since all it would take was either an Academic and Welfare Officer to be personally involved or to be easily persuaded by another member of the Union.

Since the Media Charter was brought in, there have been no such straightforward cases of the welfare clause being exploited, yet (speaking from my own personal experience) stories involving the Students’ Union have received more attention that any other stories, both from a legal and a welfare point of view.

The decision on what information is in the public interest is also contentious, and one on which members of the Union are not necessarily the best judges. An example of this is Vision’s attempts to print full details of how security lapses in Derwent have left students extremely vulnerable.

Yet students were denied the full knowledge of the inability of campus managers to deal with the problem due to worries that the article would leave the rooms more vulnerable. Vision’s duty is to expose these problems, not to deal with them. From that point on it is the University’s responsibility to make sure the issue is dealt with, yet without students holding full knowledge of the incidents there will be no pressure from the student body. As Vision correctly stated, if the full details were printed, you could be sure that the University’s reaction would have been a lot quicker than the seven months they have so far taken.

It is clear that if campus media’s proud tradition of holding to account the University, the Union and anyone who is a responsible body for the students is to continue, then the charter needs to be finally and thoroughly rethought. As much as the current Union may protest that they would only hinder the freedom of campus press over serious issues, the vaguely termed nature of the charter and its inherent failings means that they must change it to guard against any future dangers. Only then can the Union and campus media regain trust and mutual professional respect.

However, this was not just any standard log fire – this was a log fire with patented ‘clear-burn’ technology. Not only did a complex air system mean that no smoke emissions were produced, it was also kept running by waste wood that Cossham had collected himself. This, he explained, would have produced carbon emissions anyway if left rotting. Add to this that the fire was warming water for washing up, bathing and the coffee he was about to brew, and I could see that this is a man who takes his environmentally friendly lifestyle very seriously indeed.

On walking through to the back of his Hull Road house, you can see the fruits of his passion. Stretching back an incredible 80 metres, his garden is divided into various areas, each with their own role in Cossham’s green lifestyle. The majority of these hold compost bins, and he admits that although he grows many crops such as wild mushrooms, yams and fennel, he “is more of a composter than a gardener.” Rubber bands, human hair, vacuum dust, even shoes – you name it, he’s probably composted it.

He also uses them for recycling fruit and vegetables and the organic shop ‘Out of This World’ pays him to remove some of their unsold fresh produce. From this and other various outlets around York he collects over 100 kilos of the stuff every week, all of which goes straight into one of his bins. Infamously he also composts a rather more unusual substance – human waste. 4 of his bins are dedicated to recycling his own personal produce and, covered in straw and left for two years, it eventually produces human manure nutritionally identical to the farmyard variety.

He tells me that he was inspired by a “book which changed my life – The Humanure Handbook by Joseph Jenkins. After reading that I had to do it, and I built my own composting toilet in 2002.” Apparently the rest of his family don’t quite share his enthusiasm. “I don’t force the kids to use it – one of them might if he’s caught short whilst in the garden, but they mainly tend to use our one indoors. The thing is I’m not into being told what to do myself, so therefore I don’t instruct other people how to live their lives although I do like to give them information.”

It was his unusual recycling methods that got him onto national television, turning him (albeit briefly) into somewhat of a local celebrity. Those of you who are avid fans of BBC’s Newsnight will remember Ethical Man – the alter-ego of journalist Justin Rowlatt who was tasked by his bosses to live as ethical a lifestyle as possible over a period of a year. Cossham watched the show and, always eager to spread his green message, emailed the producers with some of the green measures he was taking in his life. Rowlatt, understandably intrigued by the idea of a composting toilet, emailed back and eventually did some filming at Cossham’s house, and the two remain in friendly contact.

Day to day, it is the local projects that Cossham is mainly involved in. One of these is the York Rotters, a partnership project between York City Council and Friends of St Nicholas Fields. They are a network of York residents who have been trained to give help and advice about home composting. “I’m very keen on the social side of sustainability, and the idea of green communities. There’s social benefits, natural benefits and economical benefits to living a green lifestyle.”

Once we’d explored his garden, we sat down to chat about just how he got into the green side of life. As a child he was always into animals, yet a fur allergy limited his options for pets. “My social skills were crap. I wasn’t very liked, and to be honest I wasn’t that big a fan of people. Yet I couldn’t keep what you might call your standard animals, such as cats and dogs, so instead had to have pets like toads, terrapins and snails.” Considering the extent to which he has embraced his ethical lifestyle, it is not surprising to learn that he believes he suffered from Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder. “I have seen some professionals who said that I had it as a child, but they can’t say whether I still have it. Some friends say I do and I’m basically self-diagnosed, but looking back I do feel lucky. I could have ended up in prison, on hard drugs or even contemplating suicide.”

At the age of 18 he began a teacher training course, yet he said he was too “anarchic” to do it for more than a year. Around the same time he started to become aware of environmental issues and became a feminist. In his mid-20s he decided to take some career advice in order to work out what he wanted to do. “I went along and answered a load of questions, and they said I should be an environmental health officer. I did a degree, and entitled my dissertation on recycling: ‘A Lot of Rot’”. Yet his current employment can be seen as a far cry from that. He says his obsessive personality manifested itself again when he began to take up the Devil Sticks, a form of juggling using a baton and two control sticks. Enamoured with it, Cossham began practicing for 6 hours a day. It was when he started busking in St Helen’s Square that he became fully aware of the possibilities that it offered. “At first it was great that people would stop and watch, as in truth I’m a bit of an attention seeker. Within a month of doing it however someone came up and asked me if I wanted to go to a party. I didn’t really get what they meant, so I said thanks but no thanks. It was only after a few times of it happening that it finally clicked – they wanted to pay me to do my tricks!” After a few small gigs, he went on a course designed to teach you how to start up your own business. His professional persona is now ‘Professor Fiddlesticks’, and he not only does circus skills but can also combine them with educational lessons. “To be honest I never set out to be an entertainer. However I am one now, and I’m very lucky to be one.”

The relentless enthusiasm which one must need to be a children’s entertainer is clearly very much a part of Cossham’s personality. His job may leave him with effectively a five-day weekend, yet he is never off his feet. Whether it is composting in his garden, collecting waste from around the local area or talking and helping others to do more for the environment, he seemingly can’t stop his passion for green issues. As a result he is one of those people that really do seem to be making a difference – not just by reducing his own impact on the world, but by working to help others do the same.

Toby tries to buy ethically viable produce

Living a ‘low-carbon’ life is the green brigade’s latest idea on how individuals can help halt climate change. Toby Green spends a week trying to limit his carbon emissions to see whether he can make a difference – without breaking the bank

When even Rupert Murdoch is vowing to fight climate change, you know that environmental issues are starting to make an impression. My aim a week ago was not quite as grand as the Australian business giant’s vow to cut down the carbon emissions of News Corporation from 640,000 tonnes to zero in three years. However, inspired by How to Live a Low-Carbon Life, a self-help guide for the environmentally wasteful, I decided to spend seven days reducing the impact of my personal carbon footprint on the world.

The ethos behind the book, written by Oxfordshire Green Party parliamentary candidate Chris Goodall, is direct: individuals, rather than big companies, are the defining factor through which climate change can be halted. To accept this is rather unsettling: it is easy to convince yourself that as long as businesses in China and America pump out billions of tonnes of carbon emissions, then your own contribution to the cause will be utterly worthless. However, as the book states, governments are failing to do anything because they have no public mandate.

Yet I had a problem. The two biggest sources of consumer carbon emissions that need to be addressed are flying and driving: not generally day-to-day activities that students can address. I put this to Chris, who agreed that it’s a problem: “It is true that students probably have the least control over their environment, although even a small amount of flights produce a massive carbon footprint. However, after flying and driving, it is energy usage in your home that is the next most carbon-intensive activity. Again, though, it’s things like insulation that students can’t do much about.”

Chris did have plenty of suggestions, though. “It’s all about thinking what you can control – take food for example. You should be aiming to limit your air miles [the distance food has been flown], the amount of processed food you consume and the packaging. Secondly, switching off plugs instead of leaving things on standby may sound basic, but it is still vital. And thirdly, recycling. To make an aluminium can from scratch uses up 10 times more energy than recycling a can.”

Recycling bikes, St Nicholas’ Fields

Despite having a book, a personal carbon mentor and clear aims for my new lifestyle, the first day was a bit of an anti-climax. Thanks to upcoming essay deadlines, my life had been revolving around two objects: my computer and a coffee cup. Fitting these two into my new life was going to be a problem. Would using campus computers be better or should I work at home? Should I buy fair-trade coffee from Vanbrugh or avoid it completely because of its energy-intensive brewing process? I decided to go to campus, but my willpower wasn’t strong enough to leave off the coffee.

The verdict from Chris that evening was mixed. In terms of writing my essay, I had done the right thing: “One of the big things about cutting your carbon usage is using resources that are already emitting carbon. Since your university computers are on most of the day anyway, they are only using 10 to 20 watts of energy less than when you use Microsoft Word. Yet by using your computer at home, you’re adding 120 watts.

“However, it is better to make coffee yourself than to buy it. Boiling a kettle at home uses a lot of energy, yet nowhere near that produced by keeping an establishment open.”
The next day I decided to tackle the fruit and vegetable situation and took a trip to the market. Supermarkets tend to be the worst offenders in terms of carbon emissions as air travel is used to shift food all over the world and the buildings themselves are extremely energy intensive. Markets, theoretically, should be much better. And they are – as long as you’re careful. I was later informed that my two aubergines were highly unlikely to have been grown in Yorkshire in the middle of spring. Alongside this, I had brought a muffin to take out for breakfast, and with it, a vast amount of packaging. Throwing away the offending vegetable was not an option since, as the book explains, food waste in landfill sites produce methane. The wasted packaging was something I was going to have to accept on my conscience and move on.

By the next day, I was starting to get into the swing of things. With a 21st birthday party to go to at Dusk that evening, I had already predicted that the consumption of alcohol could be a possible ethical minefield. Chris had told me that I was going to have to stay away from intercontinental beers, and that locally produced ales were a much better option. With Yorkshire Terrier, I thought I had found the perfect solution. Brewed on Micklegate itself and sold in many campus bars, it must surely be the definition of low-carbon drinking. Yet the prevalence of mainstream lagers in Dusk meant no local options. I feel I owe the bar girl an apology for what she must have thought was the worst ever chat-up line: “What’s your lowest carbon-producing drink?” We settled for bottles of Stella that at least came from a closed fridge, but I still felt slightly tainted.

At the halfway point of my week, I met up with Heike Singleton, the University’s Energy Conservation Officer, Willy Hoedeman, Energy Manager, and a YUSU Environment rep, Tom Langley, to find out the University’s position. Working with other members of staff, they have made great progress in improving the environmental impact of the University. Yet they were clear that there was a lot more to be done. “People are more keen and aware than they used to be, but there remain two main impediments: money and resources,” Hoedeman said.

One area on their list is Commercial Services. I had already been avoiding the open-faced fridges that are used throughout Costcutter and Your:Shop due to their nonsensical wastage of electricity – a simple door on each would cut their energy usage by up to 40%. Hoedeman also sees catering facilities as a major problem: “At the moment, Vanbrugh kitchen uses 60-80 KWs constantly throughout the day and at night it’s running at 10 KWs. We’ve started to work with them to raise awareness amongs the chefs, so that carbon prevention becomes part of their training. At the moment, reducing carbon is not a priority in some places, but it will only happen if students demand it.”

Langley’s main aim is to raise student awareness and get them to start taking responsibility for their personal carbon footprint. “By far the biggest thing that people can do is behavioral changes since they don’t realise how much energy they are using. The problem is that most first-year students have never cooked for themselves. In Freshers Fortnight, people are encouraged to get drunk, but not to think about their use of energy.”

St Nicholas Fields, only 10 minutes from the University in Tang Hall, is one opportunity for students to take green matters into their own hands. Set in the middle of a small but idyllic nature reserve, an environment centre runs a recycling scheme that recycles 350 tonnes of waste a year. Using special bikes and trikes that can reach places the Council can’t, it’s a prime example of how a community works together. Many students volunteer here, providing the perfect way to get involved in local green issues.

As a celebration for the end of my week, I was to cook a three-course meal for nine people. The aim was to examine whether, by cooking together, students could improve their carbon footprint. However, before I embarked on my culinary expedition, I visited a man whose environmental efforts put everything else I’d done and seen over the last seven days in the shade. John Cossham is something of a local celebrity, and has even appeared on Newsnight twice to display his ethical lifestyle. In 2002, he was inspired by a book called The Humanure Handbook to build a composting toilet in his own back garden. By letting human waste compost for two years, he produces human manure which is nutritionally identical to the traditional farmyard animal variety. Alongside his natural toilet, he collects over 100 kilos of unsold fruit and vegetables every week to go in one of his 31 compost heaps. For over 20 years now, he has been interested in the social side of sustainability, believing that, “there are clear social, natural and economical benefits to a green lifestyle.” His clear satisfaction with his style of life was supplemented by the fact that his fuels bills were just over £200 a year. Although meeting Cossham left me slightly downhearted about my own efforts, it also summed up a key theme of my findings over the week: however much you think you are doing to help, you can always do more.

Despite this, the meal was a success: a starter of homemade garlic bread using a baguette from a bakery, risotto with locally sourced vegetables and English strawberries with organic cream all went down well. Coming to a total of £18, it managed to benefit both the environment and my wallet. An impromptu discussion group after the meal produced mixed attitudes towards what students do and could do. There was a general consensus that they would pay a pound extra for a meal on campus if they knew it contained locally-sourced food. Most people’s first-year habits were also a source of shame, with none of those in their third year remembering receiving information. Three weren’t even able to turning their heating off in their rooms on campus, and landlords that wouldn’t pay for energy-saving measures were also a source of resentment. Yet my feeling is ultimately it must come down to the individual. The University, YUSU, supermarkets, landlords: they are all essentially driven by their ‘customers’. Although Chris predicted that over the week my impact had been a fifth of the standard UK citizen, I felt I had barely scratched the surface.

Even Liverpool must put aside this year’s impressive season and start thinking about next year

Complaining about the amount of games in a football season has traditionally been the domain of grumpy old men. Priced out of watching their boyhood team and replaced on the terraces by a bunch of overpaid bankers from the City, they sit in their locals and grumble into their bitters about how the game has changed since the days when they used to watch players such as Stanley Matthews tearing down the wings.

Yet as the Liverpool post-mortem continued this week after their loss to AC Milan in the final of the Champions League, I began to understand the point of view of the old guard as they talked about how they’ll be concentrating on the league next season. The game has now reached a stage where there are so many competitions and so many games that football fans can barely indulge in the base emotions of their hobby – disappointment and elevation – before their priorities change as their teams work towards a fresh start only a couple of months away.

I guess it’s because of the never-ending nature of football. However joyous Manchester United’s celebrations at winning the title were, it was only a few weeks later that this victory was eclipsed by Chelsea’s FA Cup triumph. Similarly, any Chelsea fans would struggle to see their victory in perhaps the world’s most prestigious domestic tournament as consolation for falling to Liverpool in the Champions League and Man Utd in the Premiership.

As for the Scousers, those whose season has lasted the longest and who had the chance of greatest success, their minds are immediately forced to turn towards next season. Can it be any wonder that so many supporters fall back on the history of their clubs, considering any current success provides such short-lived satisfaction?

Perhaps this is why the close of season is so many fans’ favourite period. For the teams who are perennially mired down in mid-table obscurity, this is the time when they can dream of what could be. Their new African striker or Eastern European midfielder (or even Francis Jeffers, that old transfer window stalwart) could be their new golden goose, a ticket to unprecedented success.

It doesn’t matter if they know deep down in their hearts that their new signings will inevitably get injured or fail to settle in our British climate. For those few months, they can dream they’ve stolen the initiative from the big boys and that everything will be so different.

For those fans whose teams actually win something, it is the only time when they can justifiably call themselves the champions, for as soon as that competition starts up again, they are displaced. All that heartache, stress, jubilation and passion (and let’s not forgot the money required to follow your club) is ultimately wasted once August rolls around again. Once you’ve spent over nine months worrying about whether your team can become the best in the country, you’re also likely to be too knackered to enjoy it.

The World Cup could be seen as the one tournament that avoids this problem. Held every four years, its holders truly can put themselves forward as the best in the world for a significant amount of time. Yet possibly even the World Cup has been displaced as football’s Holy Grail by the annual Champions League. Can AC Milan’s victory be seen as a true reflection of the state of the footballing world today?

They may be proclaiming themselves as the best team in Europe, but this is slightly undermined by the fact that they finished a whole 33 points behind local rivals and Italian champions Inter Milan in Serie A. Not only that, but the catalyst of their victory over Liverpool was what can only be described as a flukey deflection.

The unfairness of football is in essence its greatest strength, entertainment-wise. It provides the sport with its one-off moments of greatness and drama. The problem is, as the grumpy men in the pub will tell you, the big businesses that control the game realise this, and you’re never more than a few weeks away from the next packaged ‘big game’.

Plans for the development, which will cost £500 million, have now been approved after previously receiving permission from the Council despite a sustained campaign from residents and students concerned at the effects on the area and the environment.

Brian Cantor, Vice Chancellor of the University of York, has welcomed the decision as one that will benefit both the University and the community. In a statement he said: “York is one of the best universities in Britain and it needs to grow in order to maintain this position. We welcome today’s decision, particularly as it will enable the University to play an important role in the future prosperity of York and the UK as a whole.

“We also appreciate the opportunity to increase our capacity for world-leading research, and welcome a greater diversity of students to York. Heslington East is a focus for optimism for the city’s future and for the region. The University’s growth will bring substantial economic, environmental, recreational and cultural benefits for Yorkshire and beyond.”

Steve Galloway, leader of the York Council said: “This is an historic announcement for the city. Knowledge, technology, finance and professional services will be the foundations of the City’s future economy prosperity and the University expansion is an essential cornerstone of that strategy.”

Opponents to the scheme have reacted to the news with dismay.

Dr Richard Firn from the Biology Department said: “The process has been an expensive way of failing to to find the optimum solution for the community. The scheme is unimaginative and environmentally unsound.”

Former Green Party councillor Mark Hill said: “South east York is set for maximum sprawl. Heslington will be surrounded on both sides by major developments.

“Life will be hell in the village for the next few years of intense construction, and afterwards, half of the city will be suffering from massively increased traffic pressure.”

The expansion will see the University increase its student population by over 5,000.

For a full report see the next edition of Nouse, out on Wednesday Week 6.

If you’re wondering why Ricky Gervais seems so rejuvenated recently, what with bathing in the afterglow of a successful second series of Extras and selling out dates within the hour for his new stand-up tour Fame, perhaps it’s because the Reading comic has found himself a new victim.

After basing what has become the world’s most successful podcast around “that round-headed freak” Karl Pilkington, and spending the whole of his 2004 Politics stand-up tour persecuting his friend and support act, Robin Ince, Ricky has found himself a new “muse”.

“For the Extras DVD we’ve done a variety of extra films. But my favourite is a programme about the different ways in which I torment our editor, Nigel Williams; he’s prepared to do anything. In one sequence, I tie him to a machine. It’s like one of those experiments they used to try in institutions during the 1950s before they got stopped on grounds of cruelty! I couldn’t even get away with that with Karl. He’d say, ‘Alright, that’s enough.’ When I wanted to paint Karl’s head orange and put it in a fruit bowl, he wouldn’t do it. But Nigel would be up for that.”

His co-star and long-term writing partner, Stephen Merchant, also seems to take a certain pleasure in Ricky’s child-like tormenting. “During the first series, Ricky tried to fashion costumes for him out of Sellotape. This series Ricky reached Blue Peter levels of inventiveness with the costumes he made, doing things like locking him in a cage. At one point, Jonathan Ross even joined in with the bullying.”

The duo’s good mood may also have something to do with defying the age-old truism that it’s tough to remain at the top. Ricky has recently enjoyed starring roles in the hit movies Night at the Museum and For Your Consideration and Stephen seems to be enjoying the higher profile afforded him by his part as Darren Lamb, the useless agent of Ricky’s character, actor Andy Millman. “I really enjoyed it, although I had to rely on Ricky to rein me in because my inclination is always to ham it up. I particularly love those moments where Darren bashes his leg against the furniture – I think my two-dimensional perfomances really make that work.”

The recent release of Extras Series Two on DVD has presented yet another opportunity for plaudits of the duo, although the irony of having such mainstream success through openly criticising the kind of shows that normally achieve Extras’ ratings is by no means lost on Ricky. “I’d rather make something that is the favourite show of one million than the fifth favourite show of ten million. Anything artistic is about making a connection, and Stephen and I have always tried to do that. We make our programmes for like-minded people. We also make them on our own terms and we are never interfered with.”

Similarly, a factor in the show’s success is the frequent guest apperances; yet, thanks to the self-reflexive nature of the show, this is equally ridiculed. “If you just get someone for the ‘ooo, look who it is’ factor, that dates very quickly,” Ricky observes. “We’re asking people to play original characters around their personas or the opposite of their personas. It’s not just a case of dressing up for Comic Relief and thinking ‘it doesn’t really count’. “Viewers have got to be able to get who these stars are in five years’ time. I think after 91 films, Samuel L. Jackson will be OK, and I reckon David Bowie is safe. I think people might just about know who he is next year.”

Stephen is particularly pleased about the magnitude of the stars he and Ricky recruited for the second series of Extras. “The danger is that everyone is so jaded about celebrity that they take these stars for granted. ‘Oh look, there’s Robert De Niro in a sitcom, so what?’ Do they know how hard we had to work to get these people? I think they should buy two copies of the DVD as a sign that they appreciate all our hard work!”

Ricky and Stephen have not ruled out a further jaunt into the world of Extras. “We’re a bit intimidated by the administrative headache of it, but Ricky and I have recently been musing about the idea that there might still be enough life in Extras for a special,” says Stephen. “It feels slightly like unfinished business.”

Ricky agrees. “The Americans are gagging for a third series. The cachet is very high now, and it feels like we could get anyone we want. It would be a good time to do another. We’ve got an idea for a special, but that would certainly be the last of Extras.”

Ten-man Lancaster claimed a hard-fought 1-0 victory in a tense and often fraught affair as Roses 2007 drew to a close.

Although York had already been announced as overall victors, it was a nervous atmosphere and the weight of expectation was reflected in the early exchanges as both sides looked overcome by the occasion.

Both teams played with great energy but little urgency as the midfielders pressurised the ball well, and prevented any prolonged periods of possession. It took until the 21st minute for the first chance to be fashioned from a tidy move down the right-side by York building up to an open opportunity which striker Dan O’Shea dragged wide of the left-hand post.

The first opportunity signalled a change in approach from both sides as they looked to create more down the channels, but clear chances were generally thwarted by the dominant aerial performances from both central defences.

However, the opening and ultimately decisive goal came against the run of play came in the 25th minute. A ferociously whipped in free-kick from Lancaster was met with a tame header from the commanding centre-back James Hopkins but managed to find its way thorough several players and into the bottom left corner, as York goalkeeper Ben Taylor was left stranded.

Despite the setback, York recovered well, forcing three corners in quick succession from open play, but went into half-time a goal down.

The start of the second period saw a greater attacking threat from both teams as Lancaster looked to finish the game off. However it was York who looked the more dangerous. A powerful run from right-winger John Seale produced an opening in the middle only for captain Dan Browne to hit a speculative overhead kick high and wide.

Play remained fragmented and frenetic, with chances few and far between. It took the sending-off of Lancaster player Paul Reay for foul and abusive language to reinvigorate a tiring crowd.

Despite the renewed sense of optimism, and the ten-man advantage York were starting to look jaded and lacked offensive penetration as Lancaster looked to run out time on the clock by holding the ball up on the wings.

Substitutions were made on either wing by the home side as they attempted to inject greater pace down the underexposed flanks. However Lancaster worked hard, pressurising the ball well within their own half of the field and defending deep to prevent exposing themselves to the dangerous pace of the York forwards.

It took until injury time to see the next attempt on goal from a free-kick on the edge of the Lancaster penalty box. All 11 men were sent forward for York including goalkeeper Ben Taylor, and a great opportunity was spurred as the set-piece was drilled into a Lancaster player.

The final seconds saw increasing pressure on the Lancaster back-line from a series of resulting corners, but it was not to be for York as Lancaster broke free and missed an open net with Taylor stranded up field. As the keeper took the goal kick, the referee signalled the end of the match. Lancashire celebrated, but in truth both teams knew they could have won.

Speaking after the game, centre forward Pardeep Singh expressed his disappointment at his own performance. He said: “It was always going to be a scrappy, poor game of football. The chances were few and far between, but they got the ball down and played it around better than us.”

“The crowd played a big part in making a tense match but Roses is a special atmosphere and it was great to play in it.”

Analysis: Long ball game fails

The opinion of Lancaster’s captain, Neil Morgan, that they were playing against a “poor side” was an overly harsh judgement on York’s efforts, but the home team’s tactics failed to take advantage of their strengths.

In a game characterised by battling midfield performances from both sides, it was the visitor’s advantage in height that won them the game. Yet if York had stuck to what they had done best throughout the match, keeping the ball on the deck and spreading it out to the wide men, then they may have walked away with some of the points.

Booting high balls into the box was understandable in the last five minutes as York stretched for the equaliser they probably deserved, yet they had maintained this strategy with poor returns for the majority of the match. With the front men unable to hold-up the ball, the tall Lancaster defence dealt easily with the York pressure. Attack after attack was swatted away, and although the York defence dealt admirably with Lancaster’s similar tactic, they were ultimatly more effective.

In fact it was when the home team kept the ball on the ground, playing it out wide and displaying nice touches, that they achieved the most. The wide men often managed to get behind the Lancaster back line when given the chance, and low crosses across the area in the first half could so nearly have been buried in the back of the net.

Morgan’s further observation that it was an “awful and scrappy game” seemed closer to the truth, yet this was always going to be the case. Despite the fact that the Roses were virtually in the bag by the time the match started, the big games of the weekend always have that extra level of tension. As a result the tie had a cup-final feel to it; unfortunately this produced cup final football. Both sides gave away countless niggling fouls, which the referee could perhaps have limited with more discipline and better use of his cards.

Despite the superior height of the Lancaster team, the midfield battle was even, with Dan Brown, York’s captain, excelling himself in getting stuck in. The game started at a frenetic pace, yet neither side managed to settle into a rhythm with no one being allowed any time on the ball.

The stop-start nature of the game played into the away team’s hands, and although the goal came against the run of play, the difference in height proved the decisive factor.
From that point in, Lancaster were not going to be bothered by the lack of fluidity and they would have scored more if it was not for the brilliance of York’s keeper, the home team’s man of the match.

As the crowd became more vocal at the end, urging York to find an equaliser, a succession of corners just failed to find a vital breakthrough. Both teams will have gone away feeling as if they had been in a tough game, yet York could be excused for wondering what could so nearly have been.

Forgive my cynicism, but big events are something York is not particularly known for. Yet from the moment the first scores and reports came in to our website from the Equestrian on the Thursday, I felt as if this was something the whole University was involved in. At first I thought manning Nouse’s web coverage would be the best way to experience Roses. Yet there’s only so much staring at a computer screen you can take, so I decided to take a few hours off each day to actually enjoy the competition.

It was the scale of the event that amazed me. The level of organisation required must have been incredible, yet apart from the poor case of the Lancastrian competitor being taken to hospital during the Karate due to an absence of medical assistance, there appeared to be barely a glitch.

Each match I attended seemed to have its own individual atmosphere, and although at times the total score seemed irrelevant in comparison to the specific clashes taking place all over campus, Tom Moore’s delight at lifting the Carter-James trophy on Sunday afternoon unified the efforts of each individual club taking part.

The attraction of the Roses weekend should not really have come as a surprise to me, as testified by the amount of returning and rarely-seen faces dotted around campus. During my time at Nouse, the two most elusive figures to track down, or interview, or even have a photograph of, have been the Vice-Chancellor, Brian Cantor, and head of Security, Ken Batten.
Yet on the sidelines of the Men’s Football 1sts, there they both were. Cantor was enjoying a game of croquet with Tom Moore and the Lancaster VC, whilst Ken Batten was making sure fans didn’t encroach onto the pitch. For a guy who surely must have Sundays off, was this proof that security is his passion rather than his job?

Considering they are two campus notables that have both received their share of bad press, it did make me think whether having a more visible presence on campus would both boost their popularity and, more importantly, help to allay York students’ fears that the powers-that-be really couldn’t care less about them. A smile and a chat every now and then wouldn’t solve all the communication problems this University has, but it would certainly produce a bit more good faith.

It was also good to see old members of the SU returning, although perhaps the expulsion of Micky Armstrong (Croker’s predecessor) from Roses D wasn’t quite the homecoming he imagined.

What was most surprising was how refreshingly honest they were about matters at the University now they’ve left their positions of responsibility, with quotes regarding campus media rivals and the management of the University that I wished I could have got hold of a year or so ago whilst they were still in power. However, this was probably more a sign of the amount of alcohol consumed over the weekend that any inherent truthfulness brought out by the event itself.

Lancaster also had their part to play in the weekend, and although I wasn’t present at any of the evening events, I had some great chats with them.

All in all the weekend seemed like a great success, even if you don’t actually care about the sporting results. You never know, Roses may actually tempt me back to this place once I leave.

It had everything that a jealous onlooker ever needs to feel morally superior about their squad. The ‘fight’, and I am using the term in its loosest definition, included slaps, arm-waving and even a tussle between Lampard and Fabregas that looked as if they were fighting over who got to eat the last Turkey Twizzler. Wayne Bridge even pre-empted the critics blaming the Johnny Foreigners on the pitch for being jessies in a fight by doing his best impression of a London gang victim after being lightly tapped on the back of the head by Eboue. The physio’s response to such a serious injury? Lightly dripping water on his forehead. Not that you can really blame the guy: ancient methods of torture seem to be the only way to stop footballers recreating the beach scene in Saving Private Ryan (you know, the one at the start where you sit there praying Tom Hanks dies so you don’t have to spend the next two hours watching his misshapen head. As many have said before about the Normandy landings, what a waste…)

Moving on, the way in which every player on the pitch, and even the managers, felt compelled to pile into the melee as if their sole presence was going to have the calming effect required made me think how different it was when I was a sports-playing schoolboy. Although my career was hardly showered in glory, I did play for quite a few different teams, and competitive sport is competitive sport, even when you’re struggling to beat St Jonathan’s School for Quadruple Amputees at darts (don’t worry about the safety implications, they were armless. Sorry.)
Yet at that point, the level of aggression was remarkably low. You could say that kids’ matches have less conflict than professional ones because what’s at stake is vastly less prestigious, yet social commentators constantly talk about the impressionable state of young minds, which would suggest they are prone to copying their idols.

The moment of conflict-causing contact that remains most prominent in my mind was an incident in a football match, when we were at that age where you’re starting to develop on from a ‘let’s all run at the ball at once’ mentality and learning about the subtler points of the game, such as passing and positions. I was concentrating on marking this one tall kid at a corner, who happened to be causing us a lot of problems in the air. He started to get annoyed as I stuck close to him, diligently following my manager’s instructions, until he turned round to me and said “If you keep standing so close to me it means you’re gay.”

Now it’s a sad fact of life that at that age this was probably the worst insult you could say, yet there was no rally of teammates piling in, prepared to fight for my honour (although perhaps that reflects more my standing in the team than the self-discipline of an under-elevens football team). Imagine if this happened in a Premiership game. Henrik Larsson, frustrated at John Terry’s close attention at a corner, turning round and saying “If you keep marking me it means you’re a bummer” would initiate a hell of a riot, or at least a lot of grown men writhing around on the floor holding their face.

Another reason that our Sunday league matches often passed without incident was that there was always one notorious kid playing for the opposition. You would hear rumours about this guy a week before the match: whispers about him being expelled from school for stabbing another kid or that his dad once beat up a linesman for flagging his son offside too many times. When it came to the game no one would dare tackle him, let alone start a fight within a two mile radius.

I think the FA could be onto a winner if they followed through with this one. Imagine Brian Barwick releasing special agents into dressing rooms across the country, spreading rumours such as Ivan Campo stealing the pocket money from a Girl Guides troop; or that Craig Bellamy likes to attack his team mates with a 9-iron (hang on…). Fabregas and Lampard would certainly think twice if they thought there was someone playing who could dish out horrifying violence behind the changing rooms as a punishment. This may be the only way unless we feel we can continue to put up with the insults to the word ‘punch’ that are currently being examined at FA hearings.

It’s either that or they’ll have to start dishing out homophobic insults after incidents such as the scenes we saw at the Millenium Stadium. Perhaps a renaming is in order for the offence itself: how many average half-wit footballers would wish to be done for ‘inappropriate touching’

There have been numerous pretenders to Davey’s throne since he retired at the turn of the millenium (Motson’s clarification to black and white TV owners that “Spurs are wearing the all-yellow strip” is worth a mention), but ever since he hung up his microphone our TV screens have been a duller place, not least since every analyst that approaches football on TV is irrevocably insipid.

The problem is that if football can be considered an art form, where are our intelligent critics of the game? Those that make their career on analyzing and discussing the greatest authors of the human race can at best hope for a Professorship at some university, yet a former footballer can get away with the most banal statements and still land himself a big pay cheque and a prime time TV gig. One is committed to formulating new approaches to the thinkings of some of the greatest minds ever produced, and the other gets away with pointing out that “football is all about the two ‘M’s – movement and positioning”.

Alan Shearer and Ian Wright are two examples. Whoever thought of entrusting the ever-charismatic Shearer with entertaining the nation in the 15 minute break between self-inflicted torture at the World Cup is even more of a sadist than Sven-Goran Eriksson and his insistence on taking Peter Crouch as the only fully fit striker to Germany. The only reason I can see for Ian Wright’s appointment is that the Beeb bosses realized their mistake at handing the Geordie wonder-kid a 5 year contract and hired the annoyingly-hyperactive ‘Wrightey’ to combat the walking personality-vacuum. Now his only job seems to be to jump around and laugh, whilst stating his thought out opinion that “England will definitely win the World Cup this time”.

It’s not that there aren’t intelligent analysts of the game, and that’s my point. When at least half of the population have considered and passionate thoughts about football, why are we lumped with such simple anaylsis on our TV screens? You only need to look at newspapers and the internet to find examples of football criticism that would put the current crop of TV talent to shame. Perhaps it’s something to do with the nature of TV: in his Guardian column David Pleat provides thought-provoking and insightful comments on tactics, yet commentating on ITV he can’t even pronounce ‘Chimbonda’.

There are some exceptions of course: Alan Hansen is always an interesting watch, if not slightly defence-orientated, and a lot of people have a soft spot for Andy Gray on Sky (not a view I share: all he seems to do is shout and wobble). But when you pair them with the likes of Lee Dixon or Carlton Palmer then any hopes of a decent discussion about the beautiful game is dead. Critics of referees are always saying that ex-players would be perfect for the job since they’ve played the game. Yet those that make the transfer from pitch to screen would surely have to discount this theory. Is it really too much to expect decent TV coverage of the country’s most popular game?

And you know what the most damning thing is? I haven’t even mentioned John Barnes Football Nights yet.

Greenwood said “The plan solved the problem with last year’s turnover. However we have now seen a further decrease in custom this year, and we are in a different financial position. “It is the same bars as before that are losing money, such as Langwith, and we have a system where the better performing bars are sponsoring those that are struggling in order to maintain the collegiate system.”

A monthly focus group, called Bars Forward, has been set up in order to review the performances of the bars, come up with possible solutions, and approve extra opening times. This includes members of Commercial Services, the Students’ Union, JCRCs and Deputy Vice Chancellor Felicity Riddy. Greenwood refused to rule out the possibility of total closure for any of the lesser performing bars, but stressed that this would be a last resort.

“If we were operating on the high street it would be all about making money, and it would make financial sense to close one of the bars. However, we know we’re in a different situation and we’re always mindful of maintaining collegiate spirit. Some people in the University think that we’re here just to make money, but we do see the whole picture. We’re here to make bars a success, but to make bars a success we need students.”

In March last year, YUSU coordinated a “Save the Bars” campaign after it was first revealed that they were under threat from closures as the University tried to counter a financial deficit of over £3 million. Despite the protest, which included a week-long boycott of bars, the proposed closures were pushed through.

Greenwood is keen to urge students to use their bars as much as possible in order to aid their survival.

You get a strange reaction when you mention Christianity and homosexuality in the same sentence. People apparently it’s the discussion of these issues that makes the website so special. “The group is made up of lots of different backgrounds and no one argues or condemns anyone. Instead the conversation is very free and also, very importantly, welcoming.” Michael agrees. “The problem for me when I came out was that I definitely didn’t fit into my Christian Union [Michael came out whilst doing a Masters course, not in York], which was the main group available for me at the time. However I also didn’t feel comfortable in the LGBT society, as I didn’t feel it was me. This website is a place in between; here is somewhere that can mend the two sides.”

During his time in York Michael found the pressure on how people sought to state his religious views particularly troubling. “When people hear you’re a Christian they seem to automatically want to define you. They say, oh you must think this, you must feel that.” He said this attitude was strongly typified in York University’s branch of the Christian Union. “One of my housemates in the first year was a member, and it was never anything I’d thought about joining before so I decided to come along. However it seemed like they were saying, this is the way we think which is right and this is the way that everyone else thinks which is wrong. You could either side with them as a Christian, or not be regarded as a Christian at all, and I felt alienated by this attitude and as a result, never went again.

Gay Christians are developing an increasingly strong voice on the issues affecting them.
Photo: Georgi Mabee

“I remember a little later in my time there, members of the CU went around making pancakes and handing them out on Shrove Tuesday. To get one you had to fill in a form about your religious beliefs. I filled mine in and the guy took it, read it and gave me a really puzzled look. He said ‘According to your answers you seem like a Christian, you look like a Christian, but you’re not a member of the Christian Union?’ I told him that people are different and that what suited me may not have suited him, but he just wouldn’t have it.”

The Christian Union at York, along with those at most universities, is affiliated to the EA (Evangelical Alliance), an umbrella group representing evangelical Christians and churches all over the UK. As a result of this the Union has to stand by the EA’s statements on issues such as atonement, the Israel/Palestine conflict and homosexuality in the Church. In a recent report entitled ‘Faith, Hope and Homosexuality’, it concluded that “monogamous heterosexual marriage is the only form of partnership approved by God for full sexual relations today” and that they “oppose moves within certain churches to accept and/or endorse sexually active homosexual partnerships as a legitimate form of Christian relationship.” For Deborah Fenney, a Social Policy and Social Work undergraduate at York, this meant that she had to leave her Christian Union committee position as Social Action Representative of the Union when she came out as bisexual last summer. “I met with the presidents [of the CU] and as they explained it to me, part of being a post holder is upholding the aims and values of the CU, whatever your private beliefs. Over the summer holidays I had the chance to pray and reflect on it, but at the end of it all I still couldn’t believe that God necessarily condemns all homosexual behaviour. I decided I wasn’t willing to be part of an organisation that promoted that view.” However she’s not angry at her treatment, accepting it as a difference of opinions. “My good friends in the Union have remained my good friends, and even if their personal beliefs are different to mine, we can both accept that we have as much (or as little) authority on these matters as each other.”

However some people believe that the Christian Union’s attitude could be causing more damage than is recognised. Rose Rickford and Ben Nichols, the LGBT Officers for the University of York Students’ Union, believe that the Christian Union’s policies is causing intimidation and antagonism on campus. “It’s very frustrating when organisations such as these undo any good work that may be done by continuing to underscore the notion that LGBT people are somehow ‘wrong’ or ‘deviant’.” says Rickford. “We’ve had students come to us saying that the reason they have been confused about their sexuality is because of the messages from the CU. I think that the realisation that the message that they preach isn’t necessarily the best way to ensure the well-being of those people would be helpful to them.”

My good friends in the Union have remained my good friends, and even if their personal beliefs are different to mine, we can both accept that we have as much (or as little) authority on these matters as each other.

This issue is of course being played out in the national arena as well as on university campuses, and as the modern world in general becomes more liberal towards the rights of homosexuals, the Christian Church, in all denominations, has found itself under pressure to change their ideas. One particularly contentious aspect of this has been gay marriage. Civil partnerships were made legal in the UK at the end of 2005, but in terms of Christianity there is a vast range of standpoints. Bishop Jonathan Blake left the Church of England because he was uncomfortable with their views towards marrying homosexuals, and instead has set up the Society for Independent Christian Ministry, through which he offers a range of services as a fully ordained Bishop. He appeared on Richard and Judy to bless a gay couple on live TV, which was labelled a “repulsive stunt” by The Daily Mail. He feels that it is homophobia itself that is the problem in the Church. “There is a growing momentum spurred on by the African Anglican Churches and the Fundamentalist Evangelical Churches that regards homosexuality as a sin and unbiblical and is therefore horrified at the liberal attitude towards gay issues found within Western Christianity and their associated societies. Rejection by Christian Communities does immense damage to gay people, which can fragment their entire lives. It is essential that universities ensure there are affirming and supportive Christian resources for rejected gay people.”

Some of these accusations were put to the Christian Union and they were invited to join the debate. Instead of answering these questions directly they decided to give a general response, saying because the issue is “so emotive, often debated at extremes and can quickly become depersonalised and hurtful, we want to recognise how difficult an area this is and try and avoid oversimplification of the arguments given by all sides.

“The Christian Union is primarily about a group of people who are focused on Jesus. The society exists first and foremost for Him rather than the members of the society. Anyone is welcome to attend any CU meeting, regardless of whether they’re a member or not, and regardless of their opinions or orientations. Membership is free and for official AGM processes you have to be able to sign a membership statement which is on the website.” For most though, the statement will be the stumbling block. Although it doesn’t specifically mention its position on homosexuality, it does state it’s affiliation with the EA.

James and Michael both see the views of such groups as the Christian Union as understandable and acceptable. “These people’s interpretation of what the Bible is saying is legitimate. However what is wrong with it is that it often declares that it is ‘the’ Christian view” says James. “I believe that if you are setting yourself up as the Christian Union, then you should at least be implying there are other views.

Some Christians are saying that what gay people feel isn’t love, it is a perversion.

“They are not the only Christian body available on campus, for example some members of the chaplaincy at York have very different and liberal views, but because of the Christian Union’s absolutist view it can create animosity,” says Michael. “The Christian Union can often make people not want to be any sort of Christian. It’s not just homosexuals – anyone that follows a way of life that is condemned is told that their beliefs are ‘the way’ and that everyone else should follow their path. In fact there are so many different aspects in the Bible that simply come down to how we read it. There are passages in the Bible that can be read to condemn gay people if that’s how they are read, but there are also instructions in there which in our modern times you just wouldn’t live by, so why are the anti-gay bits being concentrated on?”

It seems likely that members of organisations such as the Christian Union would feel victimised for wanting to follow their beliefs, however the opposition to their viewpoint seems to take two angles. Some, such as the YUSU LGBT officers and Bishop Blake, believe that the Christian Union and Evangelical Alliance’s view on homosexuality is wrong and immoral. Others, like James and Martin, accept their beliefs and interpretation of the Bible as valid, yet believe they should make clear that they don’t represent the majority of the Christianity viewpoint. What does seem conclusive though is that for Christians who are considering coming out as gay, or homosexuals who are considering becoming Christians, opinions are being upheld in some parts of the Church in a way that can be damaging. “There are Christians saying that what gay people feel isn’t love, it’s perversion. But there are bits in the Bible that say ‘Jonathan became one in spirit with David and he loved him as himself’. Hopefully our website provides somewhere for people to discuss and embrace their homosexuality and Christianity, and show that they don’t have to be a paradox.”

The polarised issue of gay and lesbian Christianity

Group members
Young Lesbian and Gay Christian Society

“It’s not easy to put the negative images and messages of the press and the churches into perspective, alongside the Christian message of love and redemption. Yet my experience of both being gay and being Christian is fundamentally one of love.”

Rose Rickford and Ben Nicholls
YUSU LGBT Officers

“It’s frustrating when groups such as the Christian Union undo any good work that may be done by underscoring the notion that LGBT people are ‘wrong’. Some students have said they are the reason why they are confused over their sexuality.”

Evangelical Alliance
Alliance of Evangelical Churches and CU’s

“We call upon evangelical congregations to welcome and accept sexually active homosexuals, but to do so in the expectation that they will see the need to change their lifestyle in accordance with biblical revelation and orthodox church teaching.”

Society heads
University of York Christian Union

“The society exists first and foremost for Him rather than the members of the society. Anyone is welcome to attend any CU meeting, regardless of whether they’re a member or not, and regardless of their opinions or orientations.”

Evangelical Alliance – ‘Faith, Hope and Homosexuality’

Extracts from the conclusions of Evangical Alliance’s report on homosexuality

> We affirm that monogamous heterosexual marriage is the only form of partnership approved by God for full sexual relations today.

> We affirm God’s love and concern for all humanity, including homosexual people, but believe homoerotic sexual practice to be incompatible with His will as revealed in Scripture.

> We repudiate homophobia insofar as it denotes an irrational fear or hatred of homosexuals. We do not accept, however, that to reject homoerotic sexual practice on biblical grounds is in itself homophobic.

> We deeply regret the hurt caused to lesbians and gay men by the Church’s past and present hatred and rejection of them.

> We oppose moves within certain churches to accept and/or endorse sexually active homosexual partnerships as a legitimate form of Christian relationship. We stand prayerfully with those in such churches who are seeking to resist these moves on biblical grounds.

> We commend and encourage those homosexual Christian people who have committed themselves to chastity and celibacy. We believe that such people should be eligible for ordination and leadership within the church.

> We call upon evangelical congregations to welcome and accept sexually active homosexual people, but to do so in the expectation that they will come in due course to see the need to change their lifestyle in accordance with biblical revelation and orthodox church teaching.

> We believe habitual homoerotic sexual activity without repentance to be inconsistent with church membership.> We would resist church services of blessing for gay partnerships as unbiblical.

http://www.eauk.org/theology

Sources of support

York Lesbian Line
01904 646812

University Counselling Service
counselling@york.ac.uk

Nightline
01904 433735

YUSU Academic & Welfare Service
01904 43 3732

Yet of all the players at a late stage in their careers, this seems a strange accusation to throw at poor ol’ Goldenballs since he was never actually that fast anyway – you would certainly not have labelled him as a consummate athlete.

In a similar way (don’t scoff, there’s plenty of similarities between me and the only English player to have scored in three World Cups) I am not blessed with the most athletic countenance, mentally or physically. Yet I feel both Becks and I fall into the role of ‘The Thinker’.

As a Tottenham fan, the role of ‘The Thinker’ has had a great tradition playing in the lily-white over the years. Glenn Hoddle epitomised the ‘attacking stylishly yet not being bothered to track back’ attitude that us Spurs fans love to claim as our trademark, and Teddy Sheringham is another whose unwillingness to sprint hasn’t prevented him from still turning out for West Ham in his post-40s.

More recently Michael Carrick has also epitomised this I-can’t-be-arsed style yet still cost United a cool £18 million, and ‘The Thinker’ role at White Hart Lane is now being filled by the 6’3 giant that is Tom Huddlestone.

So on the rare occasions that I do get out on the football pitch, I play with these so-called athletes in mind. I dictate the play. I spray passes from right to left. I break up opposing attacks, not by tracking back and making violent yet committed lunges but by simply being in the right place at the right time. This is all thanks to a footballing mind cultivated by Andy Gray’s magic pen and a shit-load of Pro Evolution Soccer.

Of course what actually happens is that I stand stranded in the centre of the park, whilst being slowly strangled by a football shirt several sizes too small (long-sleeved with gloves, natch). I normally start well, making a couple of tidy passes, before making the rash decision of getting caught in the heady excitement of a counter attack.

As I foolishly attempt a spring in the faint hope of arriving in time to score a rocket from the edge of the area, I forget the repercussions. As the game restarts I realise my fitness restrictions have left me out of the game. One run and all dignity is lost, and I find myself operating in a deep sweeper role (just in front of the keeper) or getting subbed off.

However I have come up with a tactical masterstroke, and it might just be a winner. The likes of Carrick and Beckham have tried this, but I reckon I could really perfect the tactic of playing in, and only in, the centre circle. Sure, my influence on the game might not be total, but as long as the opposition players are willing to let the ball come to me and give me time to whip out another pinpoint pass then I could be the talk of the town. This has the added bonus of not needing to have a shower already.

However Beckham might have already taken advantage of this idea already. Nowhere will he be allowed more space and time on the ball than in the MLS, and now he’ll have no need for a post-game wash before carrying his wife’s bags back from Hollywood Boulevard.

It may not come as too much of a surprise, but Noel Edmonds is a pretty contented man, and he may as well be. Following a six year absence from our TV screens after the axeing of Noel’s House Party in 1999 (he denies that this time was a wilderness: “I was farming in Devon, I was running a number of companies and I was enjoying life very much indeed”) his career has been reborn after being chosen to front Deal or No Deal, Channel 4’s smash hit game show, in 2005. His positivity is obvious from the start, when i enquire how he is, his first response is: “You know what? It’s pretty good being me at the moment.”

As honest as he has been about his self-belief and success, he’s been equally truthful in addressing his lows. In various papers he has openly discussed the recent deaths of his mother, aunt and 20 year marriage. “The thing is, I would rather talk about my problems myself rather than having it distorted by tabloid journalists. I’ve had setbacks like everyone else, and I don’t think there’s anything wrong with admitting that, although the image may be to the contrary, it has been tough at times. I’ve had a few ups and downs, but fortunately for me the downs have been few and the ups have been pretty high.

His latest venture is promoting his new book, Positively Happy, in which he extoils the virtue of ‘Cosmic Ordering’, a new age belief that, although not linked to any religion, involves connecting to the’ Cosmos’ so that it will use its energy to turn your desires true. The blurb on the back of book claims that “(Noel’s) belief in himself and the cosmos have brought him back to our screens in Deal or No Deal.” I asked him whether he had encountered any, god forbid, cynical reactions to his crusade. “You know what? The feedback has been extremely positive. I make it clear at the beginning of the book that I’m not an expert or a guru. We live in a challenging time: we’ve got terrorism, worries about multi-cultural Britain and people are unsettled by their neighbours. It can be really easy to be negative, and all the book says is if you can find a positive focus you will have a better time in life.”

The belief system appears to have worked wonders for him at least. He’s recently signed a new extension to his Deal or No Deal contract, and he predicts that its runaway success can be sustained with him still at the helm, at least for the foreseeable future.

“I think it would be a very brave or foolish person who could predict the show’s life expectancy, but I’m certainly having a good time and the audience reactions remains very positive. My career is completely focused on Deal or No Deal, and why wouldn’t it be? It is so successful and people have been generous about my role, so what else can I take on?”

My jumper days are happily over. I’m a complete fashion disaster to be honest; I work on the idea that fashion is cyclical and I’ll come back in.

One key, and often ridiculed. aspect of the show are the strategies that the contestants implement with which to choose the boxes that they open, attempting to add some façade of skill to what is basically a game of luck, but Edmonds denies that he is as incredulous as many of the show’s detractors about the reasons that crop up. “I love it, I absolutely love it, all the analysis and spiritualism. However as far as I can see it’s reasonable to say no system has ever worked. The only one I’ve admired is when a chap turned up with a Chinese takeaway menu, started with the prawn balls and worked his way through the sesame seeds.”

Although in its teatime slot Deal or No Deal has built up a considerable student following, most of our generation (or at least those of us who spent our Saturday nights in front of the TV) will still fondly recall Noel as the host of the, I suggest to Noel, ground breaking, Noel’s House Party.

“I think House Party has had quite an influence on the entertainment genre, I mean Ant and Dec have made no secret of the fact that on Saturday Night Takeaway they lift a lot of our ideas, and they do it very well. I did always think history would be kind to House Party and just six years on people are now bemoaning the fact there aren’t more shows like that for all the family. I’m very comfortable with it, although maybe not so comfortable about the pink and yellow thing.”

Ah yes, Mr Blobby. Apparently the chart-topping performing artist and primary mischief maker on Noel’s House Party is as detested by Edmonds himself (who owns the rights but claims not to have had any part in his creation) as by those who ever had the misfortune to be exposed to the music (after ‘Mr Blobby’ reached number one in December 1993 the follow up, ‘Christmas in Blobbyland’, managed number two) or the computer games that followed.

“I don’t think I will be forever haunted by Mr Blobby, although if I do I hope it will be because he’s still a very big commercial success” admits Edmonds. “Until recently people would shout ‘blobby blobby blobby!’ at me when I walked down the street, and now they shout ‘Deal or No Deal!’, and I’m much more comfortable with that.”

Edmonds’ entertainment legacy stretches even further back: he started off at Radio Luxembourg in 1968 before hosting, amongst many others, the Radio 1 Saturday breakfast show, Swap Shop and the recently-defunct Top of the Pops. Although he finds it sad, the demise of the latter has not come as a complete surprise.”

“The reason that it lost its appeal is pretty straight forward. The whole climate had changed, time just passed it by and I’m surprised it lasted as long as it did. I have to say that ever since I stopped presenting it, it has been in decline.” I give a nervous chuckle, wondering if his self-confidence knew even greater depths. “And for once that’s with my tongue firmly in my cheek.”

He certainly recognises his own achievements and you can see why people can gain a dislike for him because of perceived arrogance, but the way he deals with his low points in his life suggests that he is simply honest about himself. However one area which he doesn’t address with confidence is his unlikely status as a sex symbol. Although I quickly apologise when I describe this status as “unlikely” he protests with a chuckle. “Nah it’s ok, you should stick with unlikely.

“I am most grateful, now that I am single, for the attention of certain members of the female sex, but I do get sent some really peculiar letters and objects, some of which I suspect have been used.” He reads my mind when he suggests we shouldn’t go into the specifics. “ I’ve got teenage daughters and they just cringe whenever I say anything of a personal nature. I’ve been asked before about the most peculiar place I’d ever had sex, and I said Warrington. I think that’s as far as Noel Edmonds can go on the subject.”

Sex isn’t the only controversial topic he regularly fields questions about, for many the ‘Edmonds beard’ is his defining feature. “Yeh it’s strange, I don’t know why people are so obsessed with my beard, I really don’t know. I always get criticisms like that though: people make reference to my height, they make reference to my beard and they make reference to the fact that I’ve got a lot of hair on my head, which I’m most grateful for. Thinking about it though, maybe it’s because changed very much down the years.”

I suggest that to distract attention from his facial hair, he should bring back the equally-notorious jumpers. “Haha, my jumper days are happily over. The show we recorded for bonfire night everyone was wearing woolly jumpers and the boxing day show has a woolly jumper gag, but I don’t participate in that any more.

“I’m happy with my look at the moment on Deal or No Deal, it has to be practical as we do three shows a day. To be honest I’m a bit of a fashion disaster and I’m very lucky that my wardrobe lady chooses all my shirts. I work on the idea that fashion is cyclical, and therefore one day I’ve got to be fashionable as things come round. It’s safer that way.”

Without wanting to sound like Noel’s biggest fan, the fact is that he is so aware of his place in ‘culture’ but refuses to underestimate his own success and talent is somewhat appealing. Like Chris Tarrant and Who Wants to be a Millionaire, Noel Edmonds is synonymous with Deal or No Deal and makes it the show it is. Love him or hate him, it seems his latest ascendancy in his career is set to continue for a little while longer.

‘Positively Happy: Cosmic Ways to Change Your Life’ by Noel Edmonds is available to buy now at RRP £9.99.

The NUS Extra card promises students who buy the card “a range of exclusive discounts, offers and competitions designed to make student life more exciting, more memorable and more rewarding.”

However, Nouse phoned six local branches of shops advertised by the NUS as only offering discounts to NUS extra holders, to ask if they provided a student discount. Five out of the six questioned said that you only needed to prove you were a student to get the discount.

Alongside the Extra card, which costs £10, NUS are still offering a free ‘NUS Democracy’ card. This denotes membership of the NUS and your local union, but they have stressed that the card will “not provide access to any discounts or special offers.” However, a member of staff at the York branch of Office said “We can offer you a student discount as long as your card has ‘NUS’ written on it.”

When presented with the results of the survey, an NUS spokesperson said: “I would suggest that the staff that gave you that information were not fully briefed. “That’s not the policy and it appears to be a lack of information in those particular outlets.”

However she did admit that “students who brought the NUS Extra card at £10 would find it very unfair if someone who got the free card received the same discounts.”

The decision to introduce a charge for a student discount card has been controversial as before this year NUS provided a free card which included discounts. However, the new card does offer more discounts than previously.

Amy Woods, Student and Finance Officer for York Students’ Union, said that the card was introduced as “due to previous problems (the NUS’s) financial position is not good at all.

“However, most students will be able to get their money back in a term, and it will undoubtedly save students money.” The NUS spokesperson said “We needed an extra revenue stream, and one that would go into the unions.”

She denied that charging for a discount card would detract from the campaigning side of the NUS. “One of the aims of the card is to plough money back into the unions to empower them and therefore enable them to do their own campaigns.” However, Amy Woods said “most students see the NUS as a discount card and not as a campaigning body.”

Students have voiced their displeasure at not being able to get the free discount card previously offered by the NUS. Alex Barrister, a first year Vanbrugh student, said: “£10 is a lot of money to pay.”

The shops questioned by Nouse

JJB Fitness

NUS say: “No joining fee for NUS Extra cardholders.”
The gym says: “You can just bring in a letter from your university.”

Storage King

NUS say: “25% exclusive NUS Extra discount off storage and packing supplies.”
The business says: “Any student card will do.”

Dorothy Perkins

NUS say: “10% off for all NUS Extra cardholders.”
The shop says: “Only students with an NUS Extra card are valid.”

Peacocks

NUS say: “Save 10% with your valid NUS Extra card.”
The shop says: “All you need is a standard NUS card.”

Office

NUS say: “Office shoes offer NUS Extra cardholders a 10% discount.”
The shop says: “We’ll accept anything with NUS on it.”

Burton

NUS say: “10% off everything for NUS Extra cardholders”
The shop says: “You can get the discount if you have a Union card.”

Both Halifax and Derwent have introduced their own branded cards, the Xtra VIP and the DIP card respectively, and both are charging their students. Dave Jones, chair of Derwent JCRC, denied that his card, which costs £10, is a money-making exercise, and instead promised buyers that “the DIP card will constantly be reassessed to make sure it provides the best value for its members.”

The Derwent Privilege System is offering discounts on college balls and merchandise, but is mainly focusing on offering non-financial advantages to members, such as exclusive socials and an extra day to buy tickets for Club D. Jones also said that they hoped to have a number of bars in York signed up to offer discounts, but claimed that other discounts would be made available if these didn’t materialise.

In contrast, the Xtra VIP card is only offering college savings. The scheme, which costs £30, promises £1 entry into all Xtra events, £1 off Halifax’s two flagship Freshers’ events, 10% off ball tickets for the holder and a friend, as well as 10% off merchandise orders.
Sam Bayley, Chair of the Halifax College Student Association, said that “if you went to every event and bought a hoodie and a t-shirt you would save £21”, though he confirmed that compared to someone who bought Xtra tickets in advance, a cardholder would only save £9. He also said that the number of events that needed to be missed to fail to make a saving was “low… the card is not for everybody. It’s a way that students can save money and still get involved in the college.”

Some members of the HCSA are reportedly unhappy about the card. Sources on the HCSA committee have said they do not recall the final details of the scheme being brought to a committee vote, and the Halifax minutes do not detail a final vote. Bayley strongly denies that this is the case, and said “ I have in my meeting notes that the vote was Week Eight of the summer term, but this was not minuted properly.”

York Entrepreneurs has also launched their own scheme, the VIP card. George Hudson, who is behind the idea, said that the VIP card “is the best choice for students as it offers great discounts at a good price [£6].”

The card has found itself in opposition to the NUS Extra card, although Hudson claims not to have known of NUS’s plans when starting the VIP card. He also revealed that YUSU had blocked the society advertising the card in Freshers’ leaflets “because it posed a threat to the NUS Extra card. The Students’ Union put the NUS’s interests above that of a student society and we’re now in direct competition.”

However, Colin Hindson, Societies and Communications Officer for the Students’ Union, said they couldn’t have advertised the card as “the Union has a direct business link with NUS Extra and we make money out of it, which would have been threatened by the VIP card.”

Hudson calls it a “mistake”, saying that they offered YUSU a cut of the profits. “The NUS Extra is not good value for money as £10 is a ridiculous amount of money considering students did not have to pay for it last year.

“But they’ve had to do it as the NUS are in so much debt.”

Halfway through their set at the Manchester Academy, and the four MCs of Jurassic 5, Chali 2na, Mark 7, Akil and Soup, leave the stage as DJ Nu Mark comes down from his decks to the front and crouches behind what appears to be two Fisher Price ‘tap-a-tune’ playsets connected by myriad wires.

He hits one brightly coloured button, and the crowd laugh as a honk goes through the PA. He hits another button. Then another. And suddenly the crowd isn’t laughing anymore, but gasping as the percussionist-turned-DJ forms a fully formed beat out of a toy designed for an infant connected to a crossfader.

Later on, the whole band do a synchronised bodypop that would have put Peter Crouch to shame, followed by a dance routine to rival N’Sync. This isn’t what you would expect for a hip hop show, a genre of live music that is too often marred by curtailed sets, poor performances and, sadly, violence. But then, as the old cliché goes, Jurassic 5 aren’t your standard hip hop group.

We really are wavering between two musical worlds, or even nine worlds at this point, which has extended our fan base.

Speaking to Nu-Mark and Soup before the show, I was left in no doubt that the five piece collective from Los Angeles never underestimate the importance of playing live. In fact, they readily admit that it is a major reason why they find themselves in the enviable position of having fans who aren’t really into hip hop, whilst maintaining the respect of the underground scene from which they originated. It’s a situation which Nu-Mark jokes is “Like, how did that happen?!” He leans back, and ponders how a group with no hit singles (their biggest hit, Concrete Schoolyard, reached 35 in 1998) manage consistently to sell out their tours across the world.

“I think it’s because people open their minds to us because we open our minds to other genres of music, especially when touring. 9 out of 10 of our peers would have turned down a tour like the Warped Tour (a punk and rock US festival) that doesn’t have the traditional hip hop crowd, but we treated it as a challenge and exposed our music to the fans, who were like ‘Oh, I wasn’t really feeling hip hop before and I’ve never really listened to it, but you guys have opened my eyes.’

“We haven’t just done punk tours as well, we’ve played with Bruce Springsteen, Fiona Apple as well as Lauryn Hill and OutKast. We really are wavering between two musical worlds, or even nine worlds at this point, which has extended our fan base. The power of our show is that it paraphrases what our albums are all about, and once you see us the music becomes a bit more palatable to you.”

The crowd at the Academy is the mix that you would expect from a Jurassic 5 audience, with middle class white kids still in the skater phase alongside serious hip hop heads and local MCs trying to sell homemade mix tapes out the front. Yet when the deep bass voice of Chali 2na commands everyone to scream whenever he says Manchester, no-one is self conscious enough to resist. For Soup, it’s a simple formula. “People want to be entertained and we do that, that’s why we have such a wide audience. Whatever genre of music you’re playing, when you go to a show you want to be entertained. We make sure we get people involved in our show. It’s not just four guys standing still up there, we’re always interchanging, you’ve got Nu-Mark with his toys and there’s a range of different vocal ranges with the four guys.”

However, after the release of the group’s fourth album, Feedback, there have been whispers that, God forbid, Jurassic 5 might be making a concerted effort to reach the mainstream. A variety of different styles pervade the LP and the first single, ‘Work It Out’, is a collaboration with folk rock band, The Dave Matthews Band. However any suggestion that the ‘crossover’ feel of the record is cynical is crushed by Soup.

“Feedback does have a breadth of different styles compared to the previous albums, but that was just where the music took us. I’ve never been a fan of people who come out with new records and boast that it’s got everything you would ever need, a dance track, a soul track etc because I’ve never liked that. That’s contrived. If it was a beat we liked we did verses to it, whatever the style. The beat carried us in the direction that we went, and that’s why, although there’s a lot of different styles on the record, it still has that cohesiveness.”

The thing about Jurassic 5 is that it’s
a team effort, it’s always been that way and it always will.

Similarly, Nu-Mark has no worries about the consequences of their developed sound. “I hope we’ve been reaching a different audience this time, it’s always good to expand and you don’t wanna just keep preaching to the converted. Our fans have really supported us from day one and everything, but we grew up listening to our favourites on the radio in LA. It’s good to be heard, otherwise we would have never pressed up CDs in the first place. Radio is a very powerful medium, it’s the hugest microphone you can have.”

Although stations such as Radio 1 haven’t caught on to the group in the same way as Jay-Z or OutKast, their UK fanbase certainly does not seem to be suffering. Every night on the tour is sold out, and it’s a crowd that responds as strongly to the old stuff, if not more so, as to the cuts from the latest LP. It’s not just a one-way thing though; the group genuinely seem to love playing over here with a exhilarating live version of ‘At The Races’ recorded at Brixton Academy making it onto Feedback as a bonus track.

“Yeh we love it over here,” drawls Soup. “It’s always good to be back. We’re big fans of your music as well. Roots Manuva is dope (the South London rapper is a close friend of Chali 2na and the duo have tagteamed on a number of tracks), Dizzee Rascal is good, Skinnyman as well and The Streets have some songs that aren’t too bad. People in the US, they’re always interested in what you guys are doing over here, although maybe not so much of the hip hop. Dance more so though, when Soul2Soul were cracking it was like yeah, there was a real big buzz. But it is a little harder for UK artists in the States.”

Nu-Mark cuts in. “Yeh it’s really hard for you guys with the hip hop. I recently did a mix CD of international hip hop and people were like, ‘Wow I didn’t know France got down like that, and Japan as well.’ And it’s really tough out there as everywhere just plays American stuff.”

Later on in the show, and Jurassic 5 show their experience in the live arena as they produce one of the best sets I have ever witnessed. Despite such a hardcore fanbase, everyone in the room is satisfied as song after song is rolled out, with all four albums represented. A lot of the show is taken up with medleys, often with just a verse and a chorus being performed, but the tightness of the group makes the switches more awe-inspiring than frustrating. Frequently rapping their complicated rhymes in unison, they also give a masterclass in tag team hip hop, with two often taking to the stage at a time, interacting expertly.

Anyone thinking that the show is just too slick for a true hip hop band is left with no doubts of their underground origins and remaining credibility as they take turns to freestyle as an encore and invite frequent collaborator and up-and-coming New York MC, Percy P, to spit a verse a capella. Apart from his Sesame Street-style interlude, Nu-Mark stays at the decks but his impressive skills still catch your ear, with scratching that is not only technically perfect but fits in flawlessly with the whole live experience whilst maintaining the band’s spontaneity.

This is even more impressive considering that, up until eight months ago, he was joined at the decks by DJ Cut Chemist, who left the group to concentrate on his solo work. However, the transition from a six piece to a five piece seems to have been relatively smooth. “It was something I was afraid of,” said Soup. “People get their favourites in the group, and they could have been like, ‘oh it was better when so and so was in it’, but I haven’t heard that. When I hear people saying that the show was amazing, that’s when I know people love the music and it’s not whether one person is here or not.”

As the band leave the stage to one of Nu-Mark’s trademark instrumentals, they genuinely appear to love and believe in the live arena. Despite losing a founding member and their move over 16 years from underground hip hop gigs to selling out venues across the world, they still enjoy making music together, both in the studio and on the road. Nu-Mark sums up their ethic. “The thing about Jurassic 5 is it is completely a team effort, it’s always been that way and it always will.”