The Union's elitism is a hangover from an age we need to leave behindRobert Cutts

When I joined Cambridge one of the things that enthused me most was the Cambridge Union. The thought of watching world-renowned experts in their field talk about topical issues had me so excited that I was on YouTube watching previous debates faster than Theresa May can say ‘strong and stable’ in a campaign speech. However, since coming to this university, I’ve realised that despite its half-hearted efforts to make itself more accessible, the truth is that the Union remains exclusive and inaccessible, and has come to represent everything I dislike about Cambridge.

Paying up £170 at the beginning of Michaelmas term of first year is not easy for most students, and it seems as if many are pressured into feeling left out when they are at their most vulnerable after first leaving home. At the first open debate which I attended (the narcissistic ‘This House Believes That Oxbridge is Overrated’ debate), I asked the president at the time whether the Union offered a payment plan, considering that forking up £170 is a big ask for many Cambridge students. I was told that those on a full bursary would be offered a discount, but there was no form of payment plan offered. Their reasoning was that they could not ensure that I would carry on paying, despite the fact that the way payment plans work is that you trust the person to continue, and if they don’t, the Union could easily cancel their membership.

“Watching boys in black tie make private jokes reminiscing about their days in public school further marks the divide between ‘them and us’”

More accessible forms of payment are something the Union should really be looking into in order to make itself open to all Cambridge students – for example, paying £20 a month would have the fee for life membership paid off within first year. The reduced fee of £115 for students on a full bursary is still a lot to ask a student to pay up front, and does serious damage to their claims to be open to all.

Despite this, the Union has made some of its debates, particularly this term, open to non-members. Considering prelims are over and I’ve been spending most of my time stalking the Daily Mail celeb gossip section and re-watching old First Dates episodes, I thought attending the comedy debate ‘This house believes that a drink before and a cigarette after are the three best things in life’ would be the perfect opportunity to do something cultural and add to my ‘Cambridge experience’. While the debate itself was enjoyable (despite some questionable remarks about consent made by the YouTube-personality Jonathan Pie) it was the way in which certain members of the Union conducted themselves which left me with a sick feeling in my stomach.

Watching boys in black tie make private jokes reminiscing about their days in public school together is alienating to those from an average school sitting there in T-shirts and trackies, and seeks to further mark the divide between ‘them and us’. With bartenders bringing out cocktails for them during the debate, it seemed as though most of the £170 membership fee seems to be spent on getting the organisers off their face. While I understand that this is part of entertaining the guests, watching the President offering his mates free drinks for them to speak in between the debater’s speeches had me feeling that it was time I left.

These are just two examples, one financial and the other about the atmosphere and behaviour of members, that show that this is not an institution with the aim of inclusivity. Through its strict and unbending payment, which fails to take into account that perhaps someone cannot fork out £170 as soon as they arrive, and the way particular members of the Union committee conduct themselves at debates, the institution fails to open its doors as widely as it claims. As someone who was once deeply excited by the prospect of insightful and invigorating discussion, this has turned out to be one of the most disappointing and deflating aspects of Cambridge, and symbolises the elitist and excluding attitudes which still permeate the university