Christmas Train Strikes Could Leave Students Stranded this Festive Season

Grace Cooper on 15 December 2022

Christmas is fast approaching, which means many students will be thinking about their return home for the holidays. But such decisions might not include rail travel, as The National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers (RMT) have announced 4 weeks’ worth of industrial action. 

Over 40,000 members across Network and 14 Train Operating Companies will be striking from the 13th to the 17th of December as well as from the 3rd to the 7th of January in a series of 48-hour strikes.  Many university terms will be drawing to a close around these December dates, the University of Leeds being one of them. So, what impact might this have on students heading home for the holidays? 

Many students rely on train services to get them from their hometown to university. And amidst a cost-of-living crisis, the cost of a train journey with a railcard might be a cheaper option for students than travelling by car. Data from RAC reveals that the average price of petrol in 2022 was recorded as 166.66 pence per litre and 175.59 pence per litre for diesel which is a significant increase from the year before. This might make travel by car an unlikely alternative to those facing a journey crisis this Christmas and as such, many students might find rail travel to be one of very limited options. 

Some people have taken to Twitter to complain that they are struggling to get back to their families at Christmas. One person also mentioned that people without cars are train companies’ core customer base, although they did also state that it was “good news for national express” as it might in fact mean that coach travel becomes the next course of action for travellers this festive season. 

Previous train strikes have also seen students asking in Facebook student groups if anybody is driving to certain locations and if they can get a lift, as they have no other means of getting there. These desperate attempts to find a way home might become commonplace as these train strike dates approach and may place students in danger as they accept lifts from people they don’t know. 

Frustration towards the train strikes is evident, but this frustration is the result of a lack of change made in support of train staff. In a statement published to RMT’s website, they maintain that Network Rail neglected to “improve an offer on jobs, pay and conditions for members”. They also said The Rail Delivery Group, which represents train operating companies, did not make their previous promises about working conditions. 

RMT’s general secretary Mick Lynch stated that “this latest round of strikes will show how important our members are to the running of this country and will send a clear message that we want a good deal on job security, pay and conditions for our people”. 

As much as students are likely to support such action, it does leave those far from home facing trouble ahead of Christmas. Coaches are likely to be a favourable substitute for students that need to get home, but if this is the case, then coaches are likely to face significant pressure in volumes of people over the coming weeks if it is the only travel option. 

Students that cannot make alternative travel arrangements are likely to be among those most impacted when these strikes hit, but what can they do to help the situation? Perhaps these strikes might be a call for students to do more to support rail staff, so their voices can be heard. But perhaps it should be more of a call to the government and those with the authority to make a change, so workers are not faced with having to disrupt journeys this Christmas, just so they can be listened to. 

It is a challenging and controversial situation for both strikers and students. It is evident more than ever that more needs to be done to improve working conditions and better support is required for transport staff. As otherwise, it has a considerable impact on many and could leave students stranded at university, and transport workers might continue to be ignored.  

Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons

How Should We React to Controversial Artists

Jennifer Machin on 15 December 2022

In the wake of Kanye West’s recent antisemitic statements, we must consider how to react to controversial artists. This is an area that has troubled people in recent years, especially with the rise of accountability in the media, and yet, there is still no consensus. Many separate art from its artist in their enjoyment of many forms of entertainment, such as music, literature, artwork, etc. However, we must consider if something this innocent is damaging in modern-day society.

West’s recent statements regarding the Jewish community where he says: “You guys have toyed with me and tried to black ball anyone whoever opposes your agenda”, threatening to go “death con 3 ON JEWISH PEOPLE” reek of antisemitism. These mindless comments have been supported by the white supremacist group ‘Goyim Defence League’, highlighting the dangers of encouraging these ideologies in mass media. These groups are a direct danger to Jewish communities, and could even become violent, with Kanye’s statements virtually endorsing this.

Now, you may wonder how continuing to listen to his music affects this, as it is seemingly harmless, but this is not the case. Continuing to listen to this artist monetises and potentially even supports his ideas. His continued wealth could be used to fund groups that could harm or damage Jewish or other communities, and this can be prevented to an extent by a boycott of his work. Moreover, his continued popularity, particularly on social media, is nurtured by people’s enjoyment of his art, but this gives him a platform to disseminate harmful beliefs that could influence others, particularly impressionable young people.

We should be calling out this behaviour and holding it to account, as many have done in this case. Kanye has been dropped by his talent agency, Balenciaga, JP Morgan, and others, largely due to public disgust of his recent statements. However, this is not the first time Kanye has made damaging statements. He has used scaremongering tactics in spreading misinformation about the COVID vaccine; stated that slavery was “a choice”; openly harassed his ex-wife (Kim Kardashian) and exposed her private information to criticism, such as her consideration of an abortion. Yet, this is the first time he has faced real consequences for his actions, all because of public outrage. This reveals, loud and clear, the power of the public. 

Although a lot of controversial artists’ music seems absent of their true beliefs and actions, this is not necessarily the case. Previously innocent lyrics become disturbing with a little context. This was made clear in the case of singer R. Kelly who was recently convicted of various sex offences, some involving children. For example, his song “She’s Got That Vibe” seems harmless initially until you realise that the “little cute Aaliyah” he mentions was 12 years old at the time of the song’s release. The lack of criticism he received essentially facilitated his later marriage to her when she was aged just 14, with him being 27. Alongside this, the general theme of his song “Down Low (Nobody Has to Know)” about a secret relationship, becomes clearly about grooming in a modern context. Even one of his most famous songs “Bump N Grind” becomes disturbing with the knowledge of his sexual habits.

Overall, controversial artists must be held to account for both their actions and statements, even if this means a boycott of their, potentially enjoyable, art. This ensures a reduction in their funding, less attention to their negatively used platforms, and most importantly, accountability for their actions.

Image Credit: Flickr

Politicians Are Not Celebrities: Matt Hancock’s Entrance into the Jungle 

Isabel Barrow on 15 December 2022

Former Health Secretary Matt Hancock is a household name for all the wrong reasons. Firstly, known for his daily presence on our screens, he guided us through challenging lockdown restrictions, and then so aptly broke them through his attendance at the now notorious Downing Street parties. Secondly, known for the CCTV footage capturing his affair with his aide Gina Coladangelo, which, surprise, surprise, also broke the legislation he set forth. And now, his name has unfortunately resurfaced once again announcing his appearance on this year’s season of ‘I’m A Celebrity Get Me Out of Here’.

Regardless of the moral and political gripe I have with Matt Hancock, a current MP has no place on a popularised reality television show. This is especially the case for a show that sees you removed from society and plonked in a jungle approximately 10,000 miles away from your constituency. Although the line seems to be becoming increasingly blurred, the UK Parliament website defines an MP as “the person elected by all those who live in a particular area (constituency) to represent them in the House of Commons”. This means Matt Hancock is responsible for giving the concerns of his constituents a voice, yet this seems somewhat challenging to achieve while you’re earning ‘stars’ by eating a kangaroo penis in the jungle. 

It was reported in 2007, by the House of Commons Modernisation Select Committee, that MPs receive an average of 300 letters a week from constituents. This is a number that excludes the countless telephone calls, emails and in person surgery visits they are also privy too. Despite Hancock striking a deal with producers to be alerted to urgent constituency matters, I am struggling to see how his trip to the jungle falls under his job description. During such a tumultuous time both politically and economically, surely the one thing constituents need is the dependable presence of their MP.  

Of course, Matt Hancock would dispute this, arguing rather that his presence on the reality show is solely a positive force. His intention is to use this as a platform to raise awareness of dyslexia, a cause close to his heart. Despite being a matter of indisputable importance, there are other more appropriate means to draw attention to this. Especially considering that there is no guarantee that his airtime will relate to this cause. Reality TV is driven by the viewers and, to be frank, drama sells.

Just how inappropriate his decision to enter the jungle was can be accentuated by the removal of his Conservative whip, proving that there are consequences for those who fail to adhere to a party’s code of conduct. Despite this, it does not change the fact his constituents are left with an MP evading his job description and seemingly having a jolly in the jungle. Yet while my opinion on this matter extends to all MPs, we cannot ignore the Hancock specific public outrage that has ensued following the announcement. Countless people lost their loved ones to COVID-19 and Hancock’s mishandling of various aspects of the pandemic is frequently seen as causal. Revelations surrounding his disregard of the rules that he outlined sparked warranted rage, justified by the heartbreak of thousands, unable to say goodbye to their loved ones and burdened with the knowledge that many died alone. Some would say his appearance on the reality show is a kick in the teeth, seen as a blatant disregard of the suffering he caused.

Therefore, while this is not the first time an MP has entered the jungle, past precedent does not make it justifiable. Regardless of Matt Hancock’s alleged intentions, an active Member of Parliament should have nothing to do with a reality show of this sort. If he was finished with serving his constituents, with holding the title of MP, then there would be nothing stopping him partaking. Yet here we have a man with innumerable responsibilities rushing off to sing round the campfire in the jungle- make it make sense!

Image Credit: Flickr

Inadequate Emergency Response with Students

Jennifer Machin on 15 December 2022

Emergency services. Our saviours, heroes, idols. But what if you’re a student? Students are crazy, raucous and out of control, aren’t they? Well, that’s how they see us. They ignore us, condescend us and brush us off, but what happens if it’s a real emergency? Why would they take that risk. Their stereotypes risk our lives. Are we not worthy of help, support, and safety? 

I had an emergency recently. It was Halloween, my friends were over, and the evening culminated in a brick through the window. I don’t know the boys who stormed into our house and got aggressive when we asked them to leave. I didn’t want my refuge of a home to be attacked, and yet the emergency services made me feel like it was my fault. No, I was not out of control, nor at a wild party, I just wanted to feel safe in my own house. 

Now, as soon as I said the magical word ‘party’, she ceased to take me seriously. I had been threatened and had my home damaged, but I’m a student, I must deserve it for being a nuisance and having a ‘party’. I begged her for help, petrified of sleeping in a house that felt unsafe, and she disregarded me. What if these boys had come back? What if others saw our house as an easy target? She said it was no emergency, and that I should get some “perspective”, as the police are busy with ‘real emergencies’ and won’t be coming. But why should I have to worry about the police being overworked? That’s not my job, especially not when I have my own quandaries. I needed safety, protection, and support in a scary moment, and she failed. 

The police get the blame for not attending crimes, but do they even get reported? These call responders judge us and hold our lives in the balance through their directives to the police, and yet they don’t take us seriously. There appears to be plenty of police available for noise complaints and street paroles, but when an actual incident happens, where are they? We receive letter after letter threatening us with fines for noise complaints, with even groups of 3+ risking fines for ‘antisocial behaviour’, yet real emergencies are brushed aside.

In their eyes, we are the perpetrators of crimes, not the victims. When we have been victimized, they attribute it to our own stupidity and carelessness. They see us as perpetually drugged up and arrogant children, but we are academics and avid researchers, Even if some recreationally experiment, are they not worthy of help too?

This occurs far too often, and victims of crimes should not have to worry about police availability. Emergency services should be funded enough to support us, whether that is a local or national government issue. What if one day the risks they take on our lives ends badly? What if their neglect causes injury or even death, just for their pre-existing prejudice? We are easy targets, young and inexperienced in being adults, and their lack of aid exacerbates this. We are a generation of neglect, unimportant to our society and thus left to help ourselves.

This is not the first time the emergency services have ignored me or other students and it won’t be the last time. Unfortunately, it is not just the police who are controlled by these directives, but also ambulances and fire services, making all incidents a risk for us. These systems are in place for a reason, yet a few call operators hold this power of saviour or ignorance, not always making the correct choices, especially when it comes to young people and students.

To all students reading this, please stay safe and cautious. We cannot let people brush these incidents aside, especially when they belong to the exact services that are created to help us. No matter the funding issues, we deserve safety and support too.

Image Credit: PickPik