|
|
subtext |
|
Home |
subtext
issue
86 23
February 2012 ***************************************************** 'Truth:
lies open to all' ***************************************************** Every
fortnight during term-time. All
editorial correspondence to: subtext-editors [at] lancaster.ac.uk. Please
delete as soon as possible after receipt. Back issues and subscription
details can be found at http://www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext. The
editors welcome letters, comments, suggestions and opinions from readers.
subtext reserves the right to edit submissions. subtext
does not publish material that is submitted anonymously, but is willing to
consider without obligation requests for publication with the name withheld. For
tips to prevent subtext from getting swept up into your 'junk email folder',
see http://www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/dejunk/. If
you're viewing this using Outlook, the formatting might look better if you
click on the message at the top saying 'Extra line breaks in this message
were removed', and select 'Restore line breaks'. CONTENTS:
editorial, news in brief, lusu meeting, Goenka, city council, deans-gate,
branding, timing, fodens brass, uni brass, council report, council report,
council Liverpool visit, vox pop, letters ***************************************************** EDITORIAL In
the light of increasing evidence that the union between Lancaster and
Liverpool was originally conceived as exactly that, thus making subsequent
denials look all the more disingenuous, the Vice Chancellor's recent letter
to staff re the Business Process Review and the 'Livercaster' negotiations
was a timely dampening down of the heat generated by poor handling of both
projects. His statement that the Liverpool/Lancaster link-up would not happen
unless there were clearly 'mutual benefits' was a necessary declaration of
the obvious; a joint project which had all the benefits on one side would be
unlikely to appeal. But it does at least give Lancaster a way out. Let's be
clear; in all the sound and fury of discussion to date, not one concrete
argument has yet been advanced to suggest why this particular union would be
of tangible benefit to Lancaster, and it appears that Liverpool colleagues,
while assuring themselves that the link is a done deal, also don't seem to
feel there is much in it for them. The major driving force behind the
overture to Lancaster seems to be that the government has said that funding
will generally be given to 'large unit' research projects. So be it then, but
we're surely going about it the wrong way. Research projects are about issues
that cry out to be investigated, in company with people of relevant expertise
and experience. You don't first invite people to join in, and then sit around
asking what research to do. Colleagues across the university are already
involved in complex networks of collaborations all over the world - would
these have to be curtailed or terminated, if they didn't fit the Liverpool
agenda? And are multiple collaborations with many institutions not anyway the
obvious way forward, and something Lancaster can accelerate without being
tethered to any one institution - particularly if the tethering involves the
structures of the university? For, behind the reassurance about consultation,
there is also a determination not to prolong the process too long, which is
fair enough, but also reference to ambiguous terms such as federation. Even
if links with Liverpool are attractive, why is it being assumed that they
have to be accompanied by the loss of the ability to make our own future? ***************************************************** NEWS
IN BRIEF Max
Lazarus subtext
notes with sadness the passing of Max Lazarus, lecturer in Physics at
Lancaster since 1968. Dr Lazarus will no doubt be more than adequately
memorialised elsewhere, but he was a friend to subtext, and we shall miss his
always idiosyncratic observations. ******* International
Women's Day Come
and join in with International Women's Day celebrations and the opening of
the exhibition 'Women at Home and at Work 1900-1999' - 8 pm, Thurs 8 March,
at the Gregson Centre, Moor Lane, Lancaster. ******* Wall
of Protest On
the 8th of February a student-led 'guerrilla art action' saw the construction
hoardings on the north end of the Spine redecorated. Chalks and spray cans
were made available for passersby to add their comments. Some were against
the BPR. Some were just rude, and some were quite funny. The link below also
reports on it, though it should be noted in our students' favour that the
spelling on the hoardings was generally a good deal better than in the report.
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2012/02/492166.html
******* Senate
effectiveness The
Senate Effectiveness Working Group has begun its work. It is to meet four
times, with two consultation periods between meetings, and to produce a
report and recommendations by June. This will be the first such report since
2007. Then, one outcome of the review was an increase in the size of Senate
(from 80 to 95 members); this time, it looks as if the Group is more likely
to recommend a decrease. (subtext suspects that this apparent pendulum effect
is probably some off-shoot of Parkinson's Law.) Lancaster's Senate is larger
than those of most of the institutions with which we are accustomed to
compare ourselves, and unlike York, for example, has a substantial representation
(18) from the Colleges. While subtext does not see a larger Senate as
inherently superior to a smaller one, we think it would be a pity if any
downsizing were to erode the representation of some constituent parts of the
University and reinforce the domination of senior and middle management. (See
also 'Deans-gate' below, in this context.) ******* UCU
suspends industrial action UCU
has suspended the current industrial action while negotiations resume on the
proposed changes to pensions. The suspension will be reviewed in June at the
UCU conference. ******* Exhibition
at Storey Gallery, Lancaster A
Century of Chairs: An exhibition of twentieth century chairs from the
collection of the Design Museum in London This
exhibition has come to the Storey Gallery directly from its previous showing
at the 2011 Cheongju International Craft Biennale in Korea where it attracted
more than 420,000 visitors. The
exhibition encourages us to consider the significance of the chair. It
illustrates how designers have responded to shifts in the way we choose to
rest our legs, and how they have made use of new materials and technologies
to create beautiful, sculptural forms. There
will be a series of talks related to this exhibition. Venue:
Storey Gallery, The Storey, Meeting House Lane, Lancaster LA1 1TH Dates:
28th January 2012 – 7th April 2012 For
more information: http://www.storeygallery.org.uk/programme.php ******* LUSU
Meeting The
LUSU General Meeting on Thursday 9.2.12 was the first quorate such meeting
for three years. An actively engaged student body is something we can only
applaud, and would express the hope that those attending found the meeting a
sufficiently interesting experience to want to repeat it. We also note that
the issue that prompted such engagement amongst students was the Business
Process Review. The BPR is starting to resemble the Poll Tax in the 1980s and
the present government's proposed health reforms, both in that it is becoming
increasingly viewed as a poisoned chalice, and in that it is becoming
increasingly difficult to find anyone beyond a very few die-hards who
actually still think it is a good idea. ************************************************** GD
GOENKA WORLD INSTITUTE GRADUATES The
first cohort of 131 students has graduated from GD Goenka World Institute
with Lancaster University postgraduate qualifications in a range of
management, marketing and law subjects. A further 556 are currently studying
for a Lancaster degree at Goenka. The promised exchange of students between
the Goenka and Lancaster sites seems not, as yet, to be happening on any
scale. Only 17 Goenka students have opted to take the third year of their
studies in Lancaster. It
had been planned that the range of subjects offered at Goenka would expand
rapidly over the first few years of the partnership. However, Mail Online
India reports that these plans have been out on hold due to delays with the
government granting University Status to G.D. Goenka World Institute: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/indiahome/indianews/article-2100674/UK-universities-come-New-Delhi-scout-Indian-talent.html.
subtext has been unable to find out any details about these reported delays. Clearly,
overseas expansion remains a priority for the university. Currently amongst
the advertised job vacancies are three 'Directors of Partnership
Development'. These are senior posts, with one Director to be based in each
of Sunway University (Kuala Lumpur), G.D. Goenka World Institute (Delhi) and
COMSATS University (Lahore), for 3-5 years. The advert states that the
salaries are 'attractive' - though in a somewhat unusual move they will only
be revealed to those contacting Prof Steve Bradley, PVC (International). ************************************************** CITY
COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVE ON UNIVERSITY COUNCIL In
June 2011, Cllr Paul Aitchison (who also happens to be a student at the
University) was nominated by the City Council to sit as its representative on
the University Council. At the time the University refused to accept his
nomination, claiming that the university regulations said that the post could
not be filled by a student. However, finding the alleged regulation
containing the prohibition proved troublesome, and the University has now
backed down and agreed to accept Paul Aitchison on to the University Council
– at least until such a time as the regulations can be revised to explicitly
exclude the possibility of the City Council representative also being a student.
After all, who wants to encourage students to get involved in things that
matter? ************************************************* DEANS-GATE Classical
scholars will recall that the Roman Senate once offered the Emperor Tiberius
blanket approval of all and any measures that he might wish to enact, at that
time and at any point in the future. This offer probably saved time, as
no-one was about to argue with Tiberius anyway, being as how people who
opposed him tended to find themselves executed, their property confiscated
and their families sold into slavery. While not admirable, the Senate's
abject sense of self-preservation was at least understandable. Two
weeks ago subtext 85 asked if anyone knew when the University changed its
procedures concerning Faculty Deans, from a system of election to one of
appointment by the Centre. We suspected then that for such an outrageously
offensive and undemocratic move to have succeeded, something sneaky must have
happened. In fact it turns out that no degree of sneakiness was necessary.
Back in 2008, a proposal to allow the University to appoint Deans (and
Principals, and Pro-VCs), rather than have them elected by those they would
represent and manage, was presented to a University Senate meeting, and duly
rubber-stamped by it. This was reported in the Senate Report in subtext 42.
We make no apology for re-printing the relevant section here: '...Tucked
away at the end of the agenda was an innocuous looking document entitled
'Appointment of Senior Officers' and this prompted the most excitement of the
day. The proposal put to Senate was for appointments for Deans, Pro-VCs and
College Principals to be externally advertised rather than selected from
among existing members of staff. The appointment panel would be chosen by the
VC, removing participation by members elected by Senate as in the past. The
reason for these changes was presented as being to increase fairness and
diversity in the appointments and do away with the possibility of vote
rigging since there would be no votes to cast. A number of speakers raised
various objections to the proposal, with one of them pointing out how Senate
was again being asked to vote away some of its rights to have a say in the
governance of the university like 'turkeys voting for Christmas'. The
possibility that any of these posts could now be filled by non-academics was
raised and confirmed. A question regarding the mechanisms by which the views
of staff could be formally linked into the process was skilfully if
misleadingly diverted by the VC into a discussion of how Professors were
appointed. Moreover, despite being clearly raised, the question of what
happens to these indefinite appointments once they have served their fixed
term of office as Dean or other role was not answered. The University
Secretary, Fiona Aiken, defended the proposal robustly though at one point
admitted that she was 'making it up on the hoof' when pressed on the detail
of the proposal, and at times looked to the VC to help deflect difficult
questions. But it's OK as she passionately believes that a professional
management is needed for the university and this is the way forward. One
amendment was successfully passed: this removed mention of college principals
from the proposal, and was prompted by a detailed analysis of the power of
line-managers to veto prospective College Principals (hardly a way of
ensuring diversity and equity) from this month's Senator of the Month (the
Principal of Bowland College, Joe Thornberry). The remainder of the proposal
split the Senate chamber with 18 votes to 14. Furthermore, with numerous
abstentions, this can hardly be said to have been a ringing endorsement...' And
see also subtext 31 - http://www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/archive/issue031.htm.
There
is so much occasion for ironic laughter in this that it's hard to know where
to start, though the sheer chutzpah of the idea that it would 'do away with
the possibility of vote rigging since there would be no votes to cast' has to
be very near the top of the list. We suggest that the Politics department
might like to consider the logic of this statement as an exam question. This
meeting happened around the time that subtext was often criticised for
routinely using the word 'spineless' when describing Senate behaviour (though
not, we would emphasise, that of certain courageously noisy Senators).
Regarding that, nous ne regrettons rien. At least the Roman Senators
mentioned above had real reason to fear the consequences if they did not
co-operate with authority. It is not so clear what our excuse is. The ability
to choose one's representatives is about as basic a right as can be imagined.
(The American colonists even started a war over it.) When we give up the
right to choose those who represent us, can we really then complain if they
act in ways of which we disapprove? Shame on us all. ************************************************** £135,000
FOR 'BRANDING MANAGEMENT' The
THES reports that Lancaster University spent £135,000 on 'brand management'
in the 2010-11 financial year. See the report at http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?storycode=418600.
Rather
harshly, the THES article suggests that brand management consultants 'have
almost no effect on how a university is perceived and much of their work is a
waste of time and money'. However, on the THES online comments, we hear from
'Terry', who really should know because he is a brand manager, and his chums
in the trade, who all maintain that brand management has been misrepresented.
Contrary to popular belief, brand management isn't all about picking fonts
and logos. Rather, it's really important, and difficult, and good. No,
really. The subtext collective has no view on the value of 'brand
management', but we trust that the university would only be spending £135,000
on something pretty special. Perhaps someone from the Management School will
write and tell us? ************************************************** TIMING
IS EVERYTHING Many
colleagues have recently received emails, apparently (and rather
depressingly, given the low level of literacy demonstrated therein) on behalf
of some Public Service Unions, from a company inviting them to 'win a
fabulous 14-night western Mediterranean cruise'. In view of the much
publicised recent disaster involving the cruise liner Costa Concordia in the
(oops) western Mediterranean, this might seem a rather tarnished inducement.
Those curious (or, indeed, wishing to avail themselves of this tempting
offer) can view the advertisement at staffdiscount@247coupons.net. ***************************************************** FODENS
BRASS Now
in their 43rd season, the University's International Concerts have gradually
relaxed from the formal all-classical-music programmes of the 1970s towards a
much broader and more inclusive set of concerts that offer something for
almost every punter. In this spirit, on 9th February the Great Hall welcomed
the 28-member Fodens Brass Band. A
brass band? Isn’t that going a bit too popular? For some of us, these words
conjure up memories of a sea-front promenade, mugs of tea and buns,
accompanied by cloying renditions of palm-court ballads arranged for
sweet-toned cornets played with too much vibrato. When
Fodens Band took to the Great Hall stage in bright red jackets decorated with
copious gold braid, this only added to one’s fears; but they were dispelled
the minute they started to play. The band was as crisp and taut a group as
could be imagined. Their ensemble playing was first-class, and every
individual player seemed to be a virtuoso at their instrument. It
is a compliment to the Lancaster Concerts audience that visiting groups
generally put together interesting and quite ambitious programmes. The Fodens
programme contained original pieces for brass band written by a range of
composers, including their composer-in-residence Andy Scott, who was present
in the Hall, together with arrangements for brass band of orchestral works.
As well as a full set of brass, there was a range of untuned and tuned
percussion, including xylophone, glockenspiel, vibraphone, marimba and
several timpani. This took up the full width and some of the depth of the
Great Hall stage, to the point where one of the players had to run from one
instrument to another to be in position to grab the sticks at the right
moment. No wonder he was slim. His athletic performance added to the
entertainment in what was already a very satisfying programme, performed with
great skill and musicality. Fodens Band have won many national and
international brass-band championships in recent years - this recognition
would seem well deserved. One
reason to invite the Fodens Band at this point in the year was no doubt so
that their conductor, Mike Fowles, could run a masterclass with the
University Brass Band, ahead of the UniBrass competition on 18 February. Last
year, having initiated and organised this inter-university competition,
Lancaster’s band was placed seventh. (For
a review of this competition and its results, see Uni Brass article below –
eds) ***************************************************** UNI
BRASS (Contributed by David Denver, for which much thanks) I
can't imagine anyone not being variously thrilled, moved and uplifted by what
took place in the Great Hall on Saturday 18th February. The occasion was the
National University Brass Band Contest and it provided a real treat. Twelve
bands participated, each playing a programme lasting 25 minutes. Two of the
bands were clearly outstanding and a cut above the rest – Brass United
(University of Manchester and Royal Northern College of Music) and
Huddersfield. The former included two BBC young brass musicians of the year
on euphonium and they performed a duet of astonishing virtuosity.
Nonetheless, all the other bands were worth listening to and were duly
congratulated by the adjudicators. The soloists too were terrific. The cornet
solo 'Zelda' by Oxford University band was the first to raise well-deserved
cheers from the audience while 'Donegal Bay' on euphonium by Huddersfield was
a thing of beauty. To
no-one's surprise, Brass United took first prize overall (as well as prizes
for best march, best entertainment and best feature – the pyrotechnic
euphonium duet). Huddersfield came second so that the real battle was for
third place. The prize went to......Lancaster! This was just reward for a
thrilling performance which began with the band coming on to the stage and
joining in section by section in the rousing 'Joy, Peace and Happiness'. The
players then stood throughout and ended strung across the stage belting out
the last tune. This was a smashing effort. The
only criticism I have of a great event is that the publicity for it was so
poor. There was nothing much around campus and nothing at all in town. A few posters and a call to the Lancaster
Guardian would have paid dividends. I myself had a bit of a job finding out
details about the day. So here is an
early warning. Next year's competition is again at Lancaster and is on Saturday
16th February. For a day of great music from enthusiastic young people – and
all for £5 plus £2 for the programme – put it in your diary now. ***************************************************** COUNCIL
REPORT The
latest meeting of the University Council opened up with a presentation from Ms
Katrina Payne, the Director of Marketing and External Linkages. Ms Payne
listed advances, particularly in digital marketing, such as reactive and
proactive initiatives on Facebook, Twitter and the Student Room. It was also
revealed that we have won an award for our mobile phone web page! When asked, what exactly are we marketing?
Ms Payne summed us up as 'excellent, flexible, supportive and quirky'. Which
sounds good to us. The
Vice-Chancellor opened his report by mentioning the tragic events of Boxing
Day morning in Salford, resulting in the death of Anuj Bidve. There was a
large attendance at the memorial service and a signed memorial book has now
been personally delivered to Anuj's family by the Deputy Vice-Chancellor. As
a tribute a Studentship in Engineering has now been established. News
from HEFCE: moderation funding – the safety net for institutions hardest hit
by the removal of teaching and research grants - has now been removed.
Funding for PGT has been introduced which is good news. Our undergraduate
admissions figures are buoyant and bucking the national trend. Diversification
news: The Chancellor presided over the inaugural graduation ceremony of the
GD Goenka World Institute-Lancaster University on 8 February 2012. The VC and
Deputy VC are to travel to China next month as an indication of our support
for the development of a campus there. The Study Group students now have a
new facility here on campus. Good
news was our successes in research funding but bad news about our MBA falling
from 45 to 71 in the Financial Times League Table. Finally the VC mentioned
the Business Process Review, emphasising that this is not a cost cutting
exercise but is designed to make administration better and more efficient. The
President of LUSU reported that LUSU are researching student opinions
regarding their services and activities to ensure that LUSU is 'fit for
purpose'. A delegation from LUSU are travelling to Liverpool to meet with the
Liverpool Guild of Students to discuss the Liverpool-Lancaster strategic
developments. Space continues to be an issue. The President reported that
there is strong support from all quarters for a new Student Union space to be
found or constructed. The
Council then spent some time discussing its recent trip to Liverpool. It was agreed that this had been a valuable
exercise and very useful to make contact with our opposite numbers in
Liverpool. The views of the Liverpool Pro-Chancellor and the President of
their Council (see report on the visit below) were discussed. The Lancaster
Pro-Chancellor insisted that these are personal views and should not
influence the discussions currently proceeding at a Faculty and Departmental
level. ***************************************************** REPORT
ON UNIVERSITY COUNCIL VISIT TO LIVERPOOL On
Thursday the 8th of February the Lancaster University Council members visited
Liverpool University. The Council travelled down by coach and had a short
tour of Liverpool's historic sites before proceeding to the Liverpool campus.
The Liverpool COO then led a tour of recent and current construction projects
including new residences and new science laboratories. The Lancaster Council
then met up with members of the Liverpool University Council and listened to
talks given by Liverpool academic staff on current and possible research
collaborations. The final session was an open discussion of the
Liverpool-Lancaster association. It was universally agreed that stronger
research collaboration between the universities could only be beneficial to
both parties. One
of the key drivers for a stronger 'federal' link between the two universities
has been to increase the 'research power' of both institutions by their
combined research output being submitted as a single entity to the government
and research councils. When asked what degree of federalisation would be
necessary to achieve this aim Professor Sir Howard Newby, the Liverpool V-C,
stated that as yet this was unknown. The preferred option ('to have our cake
and eat it') would be to have our combined research activities viewed as a
single submission whist each university would retain autonomy over governance
and undergraduate teaching – each university keeping its own 'brand'. The
Chair of the Liverpool Council, David McDonald, and the Liverpool
Pro-Chancellor, Professor James Keaton, were more candid and forthright in
their views. They were both of the opinion that only what amounts to a full
merger of the two universities would persuade any government body to view any
joint submission as a single submission. The new organisation would have to
have a single strand of governance, a single governing Council and of course
only one Vice-Chancellor. This is of course only their personal opinion but
it was eye-opening for some of the Lancaster contingent who have been told
repeatedly that a merger is not and has never been on the table. The
visit was useful and informative and in a reciprocal arrangement the
Liverpool Council is to visit Lancaster University at the end of March. In
what might be viewed as a portent to future negotiations, the coach carrying
Council back to Lancaster broke down and a new bus had to be sent out to
complete the journey home! ***************************************************** VOX
POP The
first rule of subtext is, of course: we do not talk (much) about subtext. The
second rule of subtext is: we do not, under any circumstances, discuss
parking issues on campus in subtext. Despite great temptation, this
self-denying ordinance has been stuck to religiously. Fortunately we did not
take the same vow concerning wider traffic issues. Following the article in
subtext 85, the letters section this issue (see below) contains three (a
record!) communications expressing concerns about the junction by the new
Sports Centre. We should also note that one of the subtext collective is
currently practising for his driving test, and when he and his Instructor
drove through the junction, the Instructor opined that it was 'a bit of a
nightmare'. ***************************************************** LETTERS Dear
subtext Very
glad to see subtext picking up on the dangers associated with the new Sports
Centre zebra crossing. It can be extremely difficult even to see people
crossing there, particularly when the sun is low. The additional road
narrowing if anything seems to have made it even harder, as a driver, to see
clearly what is going on. There must be a safer way of arranging this. Karin
Tusting ******* Dear
subtext The
article in this week's Subtext regarding the crossing at the new Sports
Centre has provoked me into putting pen to paper (or pixels to virtual
document at least). The
planning and execution of the crossing at the Sports Centre is another
glorious shambles. It
is bad enough that we seem to be incapable of engaging contractors that do
not have to repeat the same job two or three times before (if) they get it
right (anyone watching the progress with Alex Square last year will be well
aware of this issue), but surely we could at least plan properly? It is
difficult to control the efficacy of external contractors, this much I can
recognise, but I don't understand why we do not appear to be capable of
planning new projects in a way that covers all the angles. Posh new sports
centre (tick), posh(ish) new Waterside Building resplendent with NCP Car
Park–like interior (tick) etc, etc, but whilst we're busy congratulating
ourselves on the completion of these grand new edifices we appear to be
overlooking the details. Details like 'Is it actually safe for anyone to get
into the posh new Sports Centre, or have we actually just created an
opportunity for our staff and students to be inadvertently mown down, perhaps
by one of the aforementioned contractors proceeding through the 20 mph speed
limit at a cautious 45 mph?'. I
welcomed the news that some improvements were to be made to this crossing
after it became apparent that the job was botched the first time around. I
was subsequently dismayed that the improvements still failed to deliver a
safe crossing. Perhaps there is some reason why it would be impossible to
light the crossing properly? Maybe some vagary of our electrical supply that
meant the addition of a couple of (small) floodlights might capsize the
institution (electrically speaking). Let me spell it out, in the hope that it
will inspire some sort of Eureka moment for those who make the decisions on
these things – you cannot see people on the crossing. subtext
is absolutely right, unless further improvements are made soon I fear someone
is going to be seriously hurt. Surely
it can't be this difficult to get it right first time? (Name
and Address supplied – eds) PS:
Perhaps if we didn't spend so much on contractors who can't get the job right
(even if it was planned properly in the first place), we might be able to
hang onto a few of the much valued staff members who might be packing their
belongings into spotted handkerchiefs in order to meet the savings that are
the objective of the BPR?! ************ Dear
subtext With
regard to the 'accident waiting to happen' by the Sports Centre – yes, I
agree entirely as it's difficult to see (mainly) students as they emerge from
the trees suddenly from both directions in dark clothes with hoods and
sometimes earphones. But another even worse place is where the path running
past the end of the Trim Trail joins the main drive. As a pedestrian, you
can't easily see traffic, including lots of buses and bicycles, coming down
quite quickly from campus. It's a very bendy road and difficult to look both
ways and estimate the correct time to cross. As a driver, you can't easily
see people emerging from the trees to cross especially when it's dark and
they are wearing dark clothes. As a
pedestrian, I once nearly didn't see a bike hurtling down in the dark with no
lights on when I was about to cross. As a driver, I have found it difficult
to see people due to the trees and bendy road. There
should be a zebra crossing with lights there and traffic calming either side.
I believe also here it is a question of everyone being particularly alert in
this spot and I believe it is certainly an accident waiting to happen. I have
thought this for some time. Julia
Resenterra ***************************************************** The
editorial collective of subtext currently consists (in alphabetical order)
of: Rachel Cooper (PPR), Mark Garnett, George Green, David Smith, Bronislaw
Szerszynski and Martin Widden. |