Hall survey delayed

Imperial halls of accommodation were the subject of much heated debate this week following the Union’s announcement of a survey to see how the rent for Halls could be reduced. In particular Union President Alex Kendall’s comments about the halls amenities fund, which is paid from rents and used to subsidise social events, have been roundly criticised with students forming a Facebook group to resist the scrapping of the fund. The survey has been delayed until a “a full breakdown of costs [can be received] to put the other measures in perspective,” according to Alex Kendall.

In an interview with Felix last week, Kendall argued that “no alcohol should be funded from the amenities fund” and went on to say that it was “immoral” that some students were subsidising others to drink. His comments were met with a vehement response that highlights the importance the matter holds to students: “I don’t believe he fully appreciates that the funds are there to support socialising and for the vast majority this involves enjoying a drink and food,” says Adam Cribbs, a hall committee member at Clayponds.

I don’t believe he fully appreciates that the funds are there to support socialising Adam Cribbs

Kendall responded to the criticism by saying that he had not called for the amenities fund to be abolished, “what I am against is it being spent on alcohol,” he said. However, he said that the point of the survey was to gauge student opinion on such matters and that he would never “impose [his] opinion without student support.”

From the initial debate, it doesn’t seem likely that there will be student support either for scrapping the amenities fund or for prohibiting subsidising alcohol. Opinion so far suggests that students believe that the money spent makes a critical contribution to life at halls. Craig Court, creator of the Facebook group “I am against scrapping the Imperial Amenities (social) Funds”, voiced his concerns that “without the amenities fund, […] large events that are provided for residents to make new friends and meet new people (especially in the welcome week) could not be provided.”

Some hall wardens like Dr Dan Read, believe the best method to cut down costs is to look at the budget as a whole, “to ensure that the costs are justified and that money is not being wasted on expensive outsourced cleaning, maintenance contracts etc.”

Cuts have previously been made by abolishing hall senior discounts; John James, Deputy President (Welfare) last year warned that “In this economic climate we have to make cuts and [...] funding Hall Seniors is not sustainable”. Similarly a wardening review is due to take place to address the costs of Hall wardens and negotiate a deal.

Overall, the measures to try and reduce rent have been positively received; how this will be realised, conversely, is a contentious issue. Excluding the overheads for utilities rent when broken down is dependent on 5 factors; as Alex Kendall outlined: “Ethos, the Amenities Fund, Cleaning, […] the contract length and the cost of wardening.” Reduction in one or more of these costs will have the desired effect of reducing accommodation costs.

Kendall argues “students are concerned about hall rents, so the Union has a duty to at least make them transparent, if not reduced.” The union’s decision to conduct a survey is to understand student opinion and then tackle the issue of steep hall fees. “I was approached by several wardens […] who raised concern that Ethos was part of the rent but no one knew about it. […] Regardless of our personal beliefs, it is right to ask students about the amenities fund.”

The greatest fear is that the social aspect of living in halls and university will suffer as a result of reduced funds to reduce rents. If the amenities fund is indeed scrapped, then socialisation may depend on residents’ willingness to pay extra for events. So far, the College has declined to comment, saying that they will wait for the results of the survey. But as it has been delayed, students will have to wait a little while longer to have their say about this contentious area.