A Varsity investigation into the finances of the Cambridge Union Society has revealed that the Union has been operating at an annual deficit of more than £200,000 since 2009.

The Union spent over £233,000 more than its income in 2009 and £212,000 more in 2010. In contrast to these figures, it had previously finished with a surplus for all other financial years reported to the Charity Commission, reaching a peak of £174,000 at the end of 2007.

The Union has undergone significant changes since 2008, most notably becoming an incorporated charity in 2010. This transformation is partially responsible for the deficit, as the Union accounts have been obliged to include depreciation of assets (approximately £80,000 in 2010) as part of expenses, which are not included in earlier records. But even with the depreciation taken into account, the Union’s spending is currently pitched at record high levels.

In 2005, Varsity published a damning comparison of the Cambridge and Oxford Unions, with the former falling far short of the standards of its traditional rival. The Cambridge Union was heavily criticised, not just for being an ‘Old Tory Club’, but also for a lack of investment and its dilapidated buildings. A then student told Varsity that "the building is crumbling, the bar is a cross between a steelworks and a brothel, the speakers for the last few years have been distinctly underwhelming, and the whole place is presided over by an ambience of treachery and backstabbing." Accusations of censure were also levelled at the Society’s administration, with several former Presidents remarking that the Union just "didn’t know how to run itself as a business".

In response to growing dissatisfaction, the Union launched a new programme of refurbishment and reform. Union expenses saw a gradual increase from 2006, followed by a drastic change in 2009, when the Union spent £288,202 more than it did in the previous year – despite income increasing only by £11,521. In all, during the period 2006 to 2010 spending increased from £265,000 to £821,000 while income increased only from £426,000 to £610,000.

A major cause of this substantial increase in spending is the extensive refurbishment of the Union building and its embarkation on a new development plan. In four years time the Union will celebrate its bicentenary, and there is a desire amongst some to return the Union building and facilities to their former glory.

The Union has taken a sensitive, if expensive, approach towards its restoration of the 19th-century building, originally designed by Alfred Waterhouse. Notable renovations have ranged from bringing the building up to modern health and safety standards, to technological improvements such as installing plasma screen TVs into the Society’s overflow rooms. Union bursar, Colonel William Bailey, told Varsity: "everything that has been done has been done for the betterment of the Union membership."

The Union has also made a concerted effort to engage more with university students, trying to shake off its outdated ‘Old Boys’ Network’ image by increasing expenditure to attract prominent names, such as the Reverend Jesse Jackson. The visit was considered a success: as a result of Jackson’s visit in 2010 the Society believes that it gained 67 new life members.

The increase in spending is justified by union officials as offering members a more rewarding experience for their fee. Lauren Davidson, the current President, told Varsity, "We appreciate that students pay for membership of the Union; the president and other student officers are then responsible for ensuring that that membership is worth it. Part of this is putting on brilliant debates and events, and similarly important is maintaining and improving the facilities on offer so that the Union is attractive and usable. Obviously this is an ongoing process, but I think that the work we have already done and the work we plan to do clearly benefits members and increases the appeal of the Union."

However, this high expenditure also indicates that, contrary to previous rumours, the chance of any decrease in membership fee seems unlikely. The cost of membership has steadily risen over the past few years, and some worry that this trend may continue.

While increased safety, aesthetic attractiveness and exciting speakers are certainly not cause for complaint, the Union’s transformation from a shambolic student society to a more corporate business model may have its own problematic implications. As the Society achieves its goal of attracting more and more members, the limited capacity of the Union chamber may well become a more pressing issue. With guests such as Sir Ian McKellen and Bill Nighy gracing the Lent Termcard, demand for these events will no doubt be high. A serious question remains for members as to whether or not watching these events from a plasma screen in an overflow room is currently worth £155.50.

The Union is expected to unveil the next stage of its development strategy soon. Preliminary discussions indicate that plans to combat the high spending involve aiming to raise money from sponsorship and alumni donations. According to the 2010 Trustee’s report, the new Development Director was hired to launch a ‘major’ fund raising campaign across the estimated 56,000 worldwide members of the Union.

Donations from alumni in the past have been negligible (£801 in 2010, £20 in 2009), while historically alumni fund drives have been hindered by the University’s reluctance to allow the Union access to alumni records. Sponsorship currently is insufficient, accounting for only £11,000 of Union income in 2010.

The total funds available to the Cambridge Union Society currently stand at £7.8 million.

_____

 

Comment: Is the union good value for money?

"It’s easy to complain about the cost whilst enjoying the perks of being a member; but when you’re one of the few who isn’t, the price doesn’t seem that off putting."
—Emily Carlton

"Members get a lot out of the Union, but charging such a high fee puts the Union out of reach of a lot of undergraduates. It can only be ‘good value for money’ if you have that sort of money available to spend."
—Leonie James

"In my first term, I attended multiple debates, heard fantastic speakers, and saw a Footlights smoker - all for ‘free’. I am very much looking forward to what Lent Term has to offer."
—Clare Cotterill

"They should keep some form of long-term membership, but also introduce termly and even pay-as-you-go systems... It would certainly diminish the air of elitism the Union would appear to cultivate by pricing some University members out."
—Lizzie Homersham