| subtext | |
|
|
subtext ***************************************************** ‘Truth: lies open to all’ ***************************************************** Issue 129 19 February 2015 ***************************************************** Fortnightly during term time. All letters, contributions and comments to: subtext-editors@lancaster.ac.uk subtext does not publish material that is submitted anonymously, but will consider requests for publication with the name withheld. subtext reserves the right to edit submissions. Back issues and subscription details can be found at www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext For tips to prevent subtext from getting swept up into your 'junk email folder', see: www.lancs.ac.uk/subtext/dejunk/. CONTENTS: editorial, logo, another ranking for Lancaster, those revolting students, the taff vale minaret, the north, tuition fees, go west!, on the buses, our new chancellor, poster boy, student rents, quartet for the end of time, john drew recalls, letters ***************************************************** EDITORIAL: SCRAP THE CAR TO SAVE THE PLANET? This, including the question mark, was the title of a 50th Anniversary Public Lecture given to a large audience in the Management School last week by Roger Kemp, Professor of Engineering and member of Energy Lancaster. Through the Climate Change Act 2008, HM Government has committed us to an 80% reduction in the UK’s CO2 emissions by the year 2050: the lecture examined how we might seek to achieve this reduction. The chief source of our present CO2 emissions is the burning of fossil fuels, for heating, transport, industry, and electrical appliances. An obvious approach would be to switch to renewables (wind, solar, tidal etc), which are virtually carbon-free. But many of these sources are intermittent, tending not to deliver the energy when it is wanted - and it is expensive to store the energy, if indeed it can be stored at all. Another possible renewable source is biomass - growing crops with the intention they can be burnt to release energy when wanted. This is an attractive idea, but it entails turning vast areas of land over to energy crops, and the land is already in productive use to grow food. Yet a further option is nuclear energy. This may be our best option if we want to preserve our affluent way of life, but disposal of radio-active waste is an unsolved problem. The conclusion is that there is no easy solution. Our governments have made a commitment to a very large reduction in emissions with very little idea how the reduction can be achieved. The one important thing they know is that the consequences of not achieving the reduction will not be felt until after they have left office. It is clear we will need to implement a range of measures if we are to have even a slight chance of meeting the aim set out in the Climate Change Act. Scrapping the car is likely to be part of this, but this in itself will certainly not be sufficient. A plea: subtext wishes we could stop using the tired and overused phrase ‘Save the Planet’. The planet will carry on in its orbit very well without us, as it has for past two billion years. It is the possibility of civilised life on Earth that we need to save. ***************************************************** LOGO In the grand scheme of things the £50,000 cost of the University’s new logo is not a great deal of money. However, in the subtext warehouse we have been pondering what you could buy with that amount of money that might be more effective in aiding recruitment of students. On open days, hordes of student helpers for the next few years? Millions of novelty pens and key-rings? Glossy posters? Decent temporary signage? The salaries of three or four cleaners for a year or more? You could commission quite a few mini movies to be shown on departmental websites - video pods of happy students extolling the virtues of being a Lancaster student. Following the example set by the University’s management, subtext has undertaken a study shot through with methodological flaws to determine what applicants are saying regarding their reasons for choosing Lancaster. In our exhaustive survey of admissions tutors we were surprised to discover that the logo (old or new) played no part whatsoever in any decisions (negative or positive) regarding Lancaster University. In an equally unsound trawl of reasons posted on the internet for choosing a University, we found the following: the University's academic reputation; to study a particular course; because it is convenient to home; because of the facilities; because of a recommendation from a family friend, teachers or careers adviser at school; because of a good impression gained from staff following an Open Day or informal visit. Try as we might we could find no reference to logo or brands (shields or otherwise) influencing any decisions. We did come across a survey of overseas students attending universities in the UK. The top three reasons for choosing a particular university were the language of tuition, the quality of the teachers, and up-to-date teaching facilities. No mention of shields – southern or otherwise. The Complete University Guide commissioned Which? University to ask this year’s round of university applicants which factors were important to them when making their university course choices. The course content was the number one factor by far – almost three quarters of applicants said it was important when making their choice. Next on the priority list was the overall academic reputation – six in ten applicants told Which? University it was important. The majority of applicants (66 per cent) cited improving their employment prospects or pursuing a specific vocation as their main reason for going to university, so it’s no surprise that six in ten applicants said that graduate employment rates were an important factor in their decision-making. The quality of the academic facilities was another top consideration for applicants – 58 per cent said it factored into their decision. The next employment factor on the list was the links between the university and employers – half of applicants said it was important. No mention of shields – even those that imply ‘poshness’. Those eagled-eared amongst you who were watching the BBC coverage of the Bristol City – West Ham United's cup-tie on Sunday 25th January, will have heard the discussion about the pulling power regarding University applications of having a premier football team in your city. Lancaster City has an ex-premier player on their coaching staff (Trevor Sinclair) but perhaps that is an aspiration too far. However, subtext is sure that if management had actually consulted staff and students here at Lancaster we would have come up with some more effective and imaginative ways of spending £50,000 that would have yielded a better return than the shield nonsense! ***************************************************** ANOTHER RANKING FOR LANCASTER Further to the piece on university REF rankings in the last issue of subtext, we note that ‘Lancaster University has been ranked in the top 50 of the world’s most international universities by Times Higher Education (THE)’ (this from our own University web site). In fact, Lancaster is right up there at no 36 in the international table. We may ask what this actually means. Apparently the scoring is dominated by the numbers of international research collaborations, together with the numbers of students and staff from other countries - so the scores do really mean something. But do they tell us anything of value? There is a blog response on the THE web site from Michael Barnes, who says ‘THE is rapidly making a mockery of itself with its ridiculous obsession with rankings.’ One cannot but agree. ***************************************************** THOSE REVOLTING STUDENTS The capacity of the university management to over-react to the slightest hint of student militancy continues to amaze. On Friday last a small demonstration calling for ethical-investment policy took place in Alexandra Square. Given that the university is actually quite sympathetic to such a policy and is even thinking of adopting it, one would have thought the demo would have been welcomed and seen as an opportunity for constructive engagement with student concerns. Not a bit of it. University House went on to complete lockdown, with doors sealed and extra security staff drafted in to repel a possible invasion. The demo, the usual noisy but good-natured affair, went ahead, with no deaths being reported. This follows the bizarre scenes preceding the University Court meeting in the George Fox the previous Saturday. Court members entering the lecture theatre were eyeballed at close range by the University Secretary who had taken up position by the door, apparently to check that no unauthorised student was trying to get in. And to make sure that no one could sneak in via the doors at the back of the lecture theatre, these same were locked and guarded throughout the proceedings. Court members seeking their comfort breaks had to go the long way round to get out. Now the University Rules rather frown on locking designated fire exits but clearly, in this case, there were more important security considerations than the safety of the 150 or so people gathered in that room. In view of such diligence the Home Secretary can be assured that her new Counter-Terrorism and Security Bill will be fully enforced at Lancaster University. ***************************************************** THE VC, THE DONKEY AND THE TAFF VALE MINARET There is an Arab saying to the effect that it is easy to lead a donkey to the top of a minaret but rather more difficult to get it back down. So it is with the Vice-Chancellor and his threat to take legal action against individuals who take part in industrial action – his ‘Taff Vale’ strategy. The pensions’ dispute is now over but that threat remains, as the local UCU continues to remind us. So here we have the VC, having triumphantly arrived at the top of the minaret with his donkey, finding that he is on his own and that all the other universities’ minarets are conspicuously empty. And far below crowds are beginning to gather, pointing up and saying things like: “How on earth did he get that donkey up there?”, “What can he have been thinking?” and “How is he going to get the poor beast down again?” His dilemma is simply stated: he knows that he got it wrong in making the legal threat but he is unwilling to give the local UCU a political victory by saying so. This was made painfully clear at the recent meeting of Court (see subtext 128) when he justified the threat while at the same time holding out the possibility of it being withdrawn. However, rumours reaching the subtext warehouse suggest that talks are in progress to see how the VC’s donkey can be persuaded back down those steps. Donkey-lovers everywhere will hope those talks succeed. We can all hope that the next time the VC is minded to take Neddy on a stroll up the minaret he first takes the precaution of strapping a parachute to its back. subtext understands that a way may have been found to enable the donkey to back down those tricky steps, and will report further in the next issue. ***************************************************** REGENERATING OUR NORTHERN TOWNS AND CITIES – A PERSONAL VIEW BY THE VICE-CHANCELLOR
subtext would like to thank Vice-Chancellor Mark E. Smith for taking the time to write such a thought-provoking article. ***************************************************** TUITION FEES Ed Miliband’s recent announcement that Labour’s preferred policy is to introduce a £6,000 upper limit on what universities in England can charge a student each year - not £9,000, as it currently stands - has caused a mild kerfuffle, more of which later. Apropos of this, your travel correspondent was driving back from Blackpool College University Centre on Friday afternoon (6th February) and his attention was drawn to an item on the Radio 4 ‘More or Less’ programme. If you haven’t come across the programme before it is worth listening out for. On the programme the presenter Tim Harford explains - and sometimes debunks - the numbers and statistics used in political debate, the news and everyday life. In this particular edition Chris Cook, BBC Newsnight's policy editor, offered some observations on what effect the proposed tuition changes would have. Around the top 60% of male graduate earners will pay off a student loan with current tuition fee levels. Though someone at the 60% line would only just finish - such a person who started university last October would finish repaying their loan in 2047, as it got written off. If you cut fees to £6,000, that person - and men who earn more than them - are big winners. Chris Cook reckoned that a typical person at that point in the income distribution might repay their fee loans three years sooner. A fee cut is also good for people who would not repay in full with fees at £9,000, but would if fees were at £6,000. This group is men who are not in the top 60%, but are in the top 70%. It helps them, too - but by less. What about men who earn too little to repay their loans even at £6,000? That bottom 30% would get no benefit whatsoever from a fee cut. There's an interesting gender element to this, too. The results are quite different for women. With fees at £9,000, only the top 20% earning women repay their fees. At £6,000, the top half will. That is because women earn less. That is why spending money on a fee cut is not as simple as it seems. Cutting tuition fees, counter-intuitively, helps better-off graduates the most, and it helps them in the 2030s and 2040s. ***************************************************** GO WEST! While we await confirmation that Lancaster’s tortuous effort to open up in China is finally declared dead, news comes of Warwick’s rather more successful attempt to open a California campus. Yes, while we have been fixated on the East, our mentors in Coventry have secured (gratis!) over 600 acres of land in Placer County in the Sacramento Valley for a brand-new university. The plan is for a 6,000 place campus to be open in 2031. How did they pull it off? No doubt our next new senior appointment will tell us. More detail can be found here: www2.warwick.ac.uk/newsandevents/pressreleases/warwick_takes_forward ***************************************************** ON THE BUSES Your travel correspondent has recently been teaching a number of classes first thing in the morning. This has resulted in a quite different passenger experience. It is very quiet and you always get a seat. You stop at a number of bus-stops that previously had just been a blur. School children get on and wave goodbye to (still) anxious parents – the kids still very proud of their show of independence as they alight at their stop. You have to endure what feels like an endless wait at the St.Martins / Bowerham Hotel bus-stop whilst the driver waits time. Drivers wait for passengers running to catch the bus – doors are not closed just as someone runs alongside, the driver oblivious to the hammering on the side. It is a quite different experience except for that part of the journey on the stretch of road after the speed limit changes (provided you do not stop at the Bailrigg Lane bus-stop) and the traffic lights at the entrance to the University. This is where all drivers have their Lewis Hamilton moment – it is obvious to your correspondent that they are all having some internal competition as to who can reach 40 mph the fastest. In the interest of transparency we hope Stagecoach publish the results without us having to resort to a FOI request. ***************************************************** OUR NEW CHANCELLOR The report on the Court meeting in our last issue (subtext 128) gave Alan Milburn good marks for his contribution to the meeting, although noting that readers of subtext might be ‘deeply suspicious of him, given his New Labour pedigree and links to the private healthcare industry.’ These links were enumerated in The Mirror newspaper on 28 January, and are confirmed by his own web entry. They include Milburn’s own company AM Strategy; a consultancy with Bridgepoint Capital, a venture-capital firm involved in financing private health care companies moving into the NHS; the post of vice-chair of Lloyds Pharmacy advisory board; and the chairmanship of PriceWaterhouseCoopers’ new Health Industry Advisory Board. According to The Mirror, John (now Lord) Prescott suggested Milburn and John (now Lord) Hutton were ‘Tory collaborators’ because of their involvement with the private healthcare industry. An opportunity to investigate Milburn’s position may be offered at his lecture at 6.30 pm on 4 March in The Round at the Duke’s, on the topic Bridging the great divide - how Britain can be a socially mobile country. Information on how to book is given in LU Text 688, dated 13 February 2015. ***************************************************** POSTER BOY The Rt. Hon. Alan Milburn will be installed as the University of Lancaster's new Chancellor on March 3rd, and many readers of subtext will have received an invitation to the proceedings. Our previous Chancellor, Sir Christian Bonington, was granted much pomp and circumstance in Dalton Square ten years ago, culminating in a regal procession in the Town Hall. Why Mr. Milburn's procession will consist only of a couple of hours in the Great Hall we don't know; maybe his 'umble beginnings have instilled a distaste for such poncin' around. However, it seems that one concession to special treatment granted to Mr. Milburn is the planned removal of posters on the day. Any such blanket purge outside of the normal, constituted cycle (agreed between the Students' Union and the University) is seldom well received, especially given that his installation coincides with the Students' Union's sabbatical officer election period. While there are many documented and agreed reasons outlining when a poster should be removed, 'installation of new Chancellor', surprisingly, is not one of them. subtext understands that the University had initially intended to undertake a blanket purge, before reaching a compromise with the SU. Well, the University's idiosyncratic interpretation of a 'compromise', at least; they instead will only purge the area leading up to the Great Hall. But candidates will have to put new posters up after the ceremony by themselves. And the SU will have to fund the topping up of campaign budgets to account for it. You might think that our former elected MP and Lancaster graduate of a Chancellor would rather enjoy seeing all the democracy floating about the place and being reminded of simpler times as a student, but alas, the University would rather the place looked 'neat and tidy' for when the Chancellor gets here. You might also wonder if the University will actually honour their compromise when they realise just how much campus resembles a refugee camp, with its bed sheets and cardboard boxes everywhere, during SU election time. ***************************************************** STUDENT RENTS The Telegraph of Wednesday 11 February reports on a study by the web site StuRents (https://sturents.com), in which rents paid by students in a number of centres across the country are compared with those paid by non-students living in similar accommodation. In the southern half of England the finding was that student rents were less than those charged to non-students, probably because the non-student rental market is subject to upward pressure from young professionals and rapidly-rising house prices. However, in the north the opposite is the case: students are thought to ‘represent a more premium demographic, and rental prices are adjusted upwards to accommodate this.’ In Lancaster student rents were significantly higher than those for non-students. ***************************************************** QUARTET FOR THE END OF TIME Olivier Messiaen’s Quartet for the End of Time was composed in 1940 for violin, cello, clarinet and piano. Messiaen wrote the piece whilst a prisoner of war in Stalag VIII: the unusual combination was chosen because he discovered there were talented performers on these four instruments among the prisoners in the camp, including himself on the piano. The composition of the piece was facilitated by one of the German prison guards who was himself a music-lover: he provided Messiaen with writing materials, and allowed him a quiet space in which to compose. The final stroke of good fortune was that the hour-long work was performed in the camp before an audience of guards and other prisoners, numbering several hundred. Although, or possibly because, the temperature was below freezing, the audience listened in rapt silence. The Quartet for the End of Time was inspired by a passage from the Book of Revelations, beginning ‘I saw a mighty angel descend from heaven clad in mist: a rainbow was on his head....’ One might imagine from this that Messiaen was an other-worldly, completely-visionary composer, but in fact he made substantial contributions to music analysis, and was an outstanding teacher - he taught a number of eminent musicians, including the composers Pierre Boulez, Karlheinz Stockhausen and Alexander Goehr, as well as many others less well-known. One of the best sources of information on his Quartet is the excellent Cambridge Music Guide Messiaen: Quatuor pour la fin du Temps, written by Anthony Pople, late of Lancaster University Music Department. It is a sad fact that Pople died in 2003 aged only 48, leaving his wife Angela (a graduate in Music from Lancaster) and two young daughters, to one of whom the book is dedicated. His obituary in the Independent at that time noted that ‘a colleague of Pople's described him as "a remarkable (and rare) combination of brilliant scholar and nice bloke". His kindness and interest in others was felt not least by his students.’ The four players in the Great Hall on 7 February played Messiaen’s remarkable eight-movement Quartet with great concentration and understanding, which might be seen in a way as a tribute to Anthony. ***************************************************** JOHN DREW RECALLS (a contributed piece by a former Student Union President) Greetings, across the generations, to those who participated in the student occupation of last December (Subtext 126). The high season for student occupations at Lancaster (or sit-ins as they were called in the sixties) was probably between 1971 and 1975 and reading about the latest events took me back. Lancaster's first ever sit-in/occupation, I think, took place during the early months of 1971 and was in support of a pay claim from the University's cleaners that was being resisted by Charles Carter. Then (and now?) they were the lowest paid campus workers. The University authorities (as we called them in those days) were completely unprepared for such a protest, as indeed were most of the students, the mood just escalated in a Federation meeting (pre-cursor of Union General Meetings) and before we knew it we were voting for an occupation. Undoubtedly the events of Paris and the LSE only three years earlier were in our consciousness. It was an evening meeting and so a rather surprised couple of building attendants (who were probably sympathetic towards the lowly paid cleaners anyway) rather readily handed over the building in the face of a crowd of student and we were in ... where we remained for three days before the University agreed to return to the negotiating table. The occupation actually lasted three hours longer than planned. As we did a quick building check we discovered, to our amusement and horror in equal measure, that a group has sprayed 'Are we getting any nearer?' on the wall of the secretary to the secretary to the Vice Chancellor's office (I kid you not, he was that well protected). A student had a boyfriend who had a car (a rarity in those days) and he was dispatched to get pots of suitably insipid paint. I can't think our amateur redecoration fooled anyone. The second occupation came in February 1972. This was a bit of an unusual one. A very large number of students and staff alike were horrified by the 'Bloody Sunday' massacre in Derry on the 30th January and the mood was that 'something had to be done' to register this horror. A march from Bailrigg to Dalton Square was agreed, but before then that 'something' would also include a lecture boycott and occupation of the Senate Chamber. Carter, who was possibly not unsympathetic to the protest having spent five years teaching in Belfast in the fifties, very quickly told us we could have the Chamber for three days to prepare for the day of action, but 'Students book Senate Chamber' lacked the right tone as a newsworthy headline so we continued to call it an occupation. No redecoration was required this time. Carter was, however, by now beginning to lose his previous tolerance of student protest; he was being pressed by a number of his senior colleagues (including two who were prominent members of the University's Monday Club, the right wing faction formed in January 1961 and then operating openly within the Conservative Party) and the local M.P., the elegant Elaine Kellet-Bowman, to 'do something' about students who appeared increasingly undisciplined and challenging. Of course, the usual clichés about unrepresentative minorities were trotted out to accompany any student protest but the fact was that all of these protests were very popular within the student body, and attempts by rightist students to win support to counter these campaigns were conspicuously unsuccessful. Carter was also unsettled by clear evidence that an appreciable number of his academic staff were naturally sympathetic to student protest, and enjoyed easy relationships with their undergraduates. Administration moves against the Communist Party member Dr. David Craig and six other members of faculty of the English Department had already been underway for several months by the time of the 'Bloody Sunday' protest (see Subtext 9), and documents widely leaked at the time created a very strong impression that Carter was fully aware of the continuing attempts by the English Department's Professor Bill Murray to rid himself of Craig and like minded colleagues. Carter's liberal reputation (he had himself been imprisoned when in his mid-twenties for three months during the Second World War as a consequence of his conscientious objection to war) hid in many people's eyes a much more complex character. Certain in the correctness of his own principles, he didn't cope well with challenge to these, particularly when the challengers were a bunch of hairy twenty-somethings. Craig, a talented and popular teacher, was actually not very close to the student militants, nor as he admitted to Subtext in 2006 was he in charge of an active conspiracy to subvert the University, but for some members of the University establishment Craig's challenging intellect and Communist Party membership were proof enough that he was the centre of all discontent. Murray, backed by Carter and a hard core of senior figures pressed for Craig's dismissal, and also appeared to be taking steps to eliminate Craig's supporters in the English department (although eventually 17 members of the Department would rally to his support). There was a brief occupation at the end of the spring term of 1972 ... brief because we only occupied two days before the end of the term. It was still very easy to enter the University House, not least because the Student Representative Council had offices on the ground floor (soon to be withdrawn!) but a crow bar was also brought into use and for a few years after there was a formal 'handing over' of this bar from outgoing to incoming student President. This second occupation inflamed the Craig Affair further as the issue of academic freedom had now been joined by a challenge to students' rights to protest. Disciplinary charges were swiftly brought against 7 named students on the grounds that they had occupied University House. This was an absurd approach to what was clearly the action of hundreds, a point that the student body, superbly corralled throughout this time by its leader Mick Murray, exposed by organising a petition in which, within 6 hours, 500 students asked to be disciplined. 'I am Spartacus' indeed. Such fun. Stories of the rest of the Craig Affair are for a later time. David himself wrote about the issues of academic freedom in Subtext 9, but there were many more twists to the affair as the University sought to bring its rebellious students to heal. These will be recounted in a future edition. There was no occupation during the next two academic years although tensions simmered at times, not least when the University Administration allowed the military to use its premises during the Easter holidays of 1974 to discuss how the Army and Police could plan joint action in the event of civil disorder action. Other student protests around funding and grants (and also the quantity and cost of food in the refectories) included rent strikes but fell short of 'direct action'. A flavour of those polarised times is also provided by a motion put to the Lancaster branch of the Association of University Teachers in October 1973 by a Reader in the physics Department deploring the fact that the University had become "a queer's paradise ... THE place for gay rights". The Craig Affair had ended ultimately not only in a significant defeat for Carter's attempt to dismiss Craig and to discipline the student body, but also in the separation of Carter from his liberal allies in the teaching staff. Professor Ninian Smart, the leading liberal and Pro Vice Chancellor, resigned as Pro V.C. at the height of the Craig Affair because he could not support Carter's increasingly hard line. Resentments from the right at the University's inability to contain student protests to 'acceptable' limits were held deeply and by the time of the last occupation of this era, in 1975, the liberal crust was thin and brittle. The 1975 occupation arose in support of a long student rent strike, which in turn had led to disciplinary action being taken against more than two dozen alleged leaders, with 7 being threatened with permanently expulsion. Again more than a thousand signed a petition that they too were part of the protest. Students were forcibly evicted from the occupation in an ugly confrontation with riot Police. The disciplinary proceedings continued but the Administration's attempt to expel students fell as a consequence of one of the remaining survivals of Carter's more liberal phase. The disciplinary panels of the day included a member of the academic staff, a student, and a lay member. In this instance the case for the 7 expulsions was rejected by 2-1 with the student representative Tom Levitt (who would go on to serve as a New Labour MP for High Peak from 1997 to 2010) forming an unexpected alliance with the Baron Morris of Grasmere, a former Vice Chancellor of Leeds University. In 1970 Lancaster boasted proudly that it enrolled a higher percentage of young people from working class backgrounds than any other university. It also basked in the reflected glory of a modernising Vice Chancellor, who introduced, at first largely unprompted, many measures of student involvement into the running of a small and friendly campus University. But the shy Carter struggled with confrontation, was prone to boiling over when challenged and making statements that he probably regretted at his leisure. Losing support of the more liberal elements of the senior academic community, he fell back for his support on more authoritarian elements some of whom would ultimately succeeded him. For the students, what is instructive is that the first three major protests were about broad issues (low pay, a rogue military, academic freedom) rather than the narrower agenda of funding and grants. This speaks of a wider social conscience, as well as an unruly spirit. To live through those times as an undergraduate was hugely educative. A great many of us graduated with a healthy distrust of those in authority (if not, quite, Jerry Rubin's 'never trust anyone over 30') and ultimately were more careful in the exercise of such authority when and if we eventually gained it. Oh yes, and we learnt a lot about painting and decorating, as well as breaking and entering, than would otherwise have been the case. ***************************************************** LETTERS Dear eds I'm intrigued by the report on continuing membership for retired staff and the implication that we are using up valuable resources and are potentially out of control. Does the University intend to end the practice of offering emeritus posts to retired professors, or is this merely about the lesser ranks? Bob Sapey Dear subtext ***************************************************** Dear all Thanks for an exceptionally informative & balanced issue. Keep up the good work. Be assured it is greatly appreciated. Denis McCaldin Professor of Music Emeritus, Lancaster University Director, Haydn Society of Great Britain ***************************************************** The editorial collective of subtext currently consists (in alphabetical order) of: George Green, James Groves, Ian Paylor, Ronnie Rowlands, Joe Thornberry, Johnny Unger and Martin Widden. |