(Dick Knight, language centre)
Leeds bid for Oslo of the north?
(Reporter 488) Some mistake surely! Oslo of
the south, perhaps? (and Alec McAllister,
ISS) At 59° 54 N, isnt
Oslo far enough north already?
should that be argent?
(John Lydon, biochemistry) Whilst
attending a lunchtime concert in the Great
Hall recently, I found my eyes wandering over
the interior décor, as they tend to
do on such occasions, and they lit on the
University crest in the middle distance, above
the stage. The proper crest that is (i.e.
the one with the helmet, sphinx and whatever
the curly cabbage leaves at the sides are
called) not the tatty modern beer-mat version.
However there is something wrong with it.
The field vert was OK and the white roses,
but I distinctly recall mention of three mullets
argent in that strange menu French which passes
for heraldry, and these mullets were distinctly
or. In an academic environment like this,
where in some quarters a split infinitive
is still regarded as a hanging offence, it
is some achievement to get our own shield
Time for tea?
(John Smurthwaite, Brotherton Library)
Stands the Church clock at ten
to three? Rupert Brooke would certainly
feel at home in the refectory, where it has
been ten to three by the clock for many months
now. (Unfortunately there isnt honey
for tea.) Perhaps if we all eat at the refectory
more often, catering services will be able
to afford a new battery for their clock. Who
knows, we might even get another clock for
the south end.
(Andrew Dye, electronic engineering)
After having read and re-read the new
policy for visitor parking notification enclosed
in the last Reporter, I am somewhat confused
as to the purpose of the new rules. How will
security verify that a visitor is not a student
or unconnected member of the public when visitors,
according to rule two, need not be pre-notified
to security? I assume this means that
anyone can identify themselves as a visitor,
pay £2.60 (considerably less than parking
anywhere else in Leeds city centre) and gain
access to the campus. So why must I, as a
member of staff, show my ID for the privilege
of paying the same charge? I cannot see how
this new policy benefits staff paying to park
on campus. I can see, however, how it will
generate more revenue as the car parks will
no doubt be full by 8:30am every day with
visiting students and members
of the public working nearby. I am also intrigued
by rule 11. Maybe my view is somewhat skewed
by being on the waiting list for a permit,
but surely any member of staff using their
permit for less than 50 days pa should relinquish
it to a member of staff who will put it to
good use 20 days a month not 4?
Pro-Vice-Chancellor for staff, Professor
Diane Shorrocks-Taylor replies: The new
visitor parking policy aims to simplify procedures
and avoid frustration for visitors. With over
400 campus visitors each day, a pre-notified
system is no longer practical, hence the decision
by Senate and Council to ask all visitors
to pay. They can be reimbursed by departments,
and on a city centre site, paying for parking
is the norm rather than the exception. Staff
will be asked to show ID cards to help avoid
admitting students and bogus visitors. Any
increased revenue from parking charges will
support green travel plan initiatives, which
should benefit all staff. Retired staff are
allowed to renew their permits, but if permits
are not used five days a week, this leaves
more visitor capacity, which is in great demand.
Departments should advise visitors (including
staff) that the demand for parking exceeds
supply, and places cannot be guaranteed: public
transport should be considered. Some departments
have suggested pre-paid vouchers for parking
which could be sent out to visitors in advance.
However, this is not possible, since a parking
place cannot be guaranteed. It would cause
anger and frustration if a visitor with a
voucher had to be turned away due to a lack
of space. This is a situation that we must
learn to live with, whether visitors are asked
to pay or not.