Skip to main contentCambridge University Reporter

No 6163

Wednesday 28 October 2009

Vol cxl No 4

pp. 89–128

Notices

Calendar

1 November, Sunday. All Saints Day and Commemoration of Benefactors. Scarlet Day. Preacher before the University at 11.15 a.m., Sir David Walker, Honorary Fellow of Queens’ College, Co-Chair of the University’s 800th Anniversary Campaign Board (Lady Margaret’s Preacher).

9 November, Monday. Michaelmas Term divides.

Discussions at 2 p.m.

Congregations

10 November

28 November, Saturday at 2 p.m.

24 November

8 December

Notice of a Discussion on Tuesday, 10 November 2009

The Vice-Chancellor invites those qualified under the regulations for Discussions (Statutes and Ordinances, p. 107) to attend a Discussion in the Senate-House, on Tuesday, 10 November 2009, at 2 p.m., for the discussion of:

1. Joint Report of the Council and the General Board, dated 19 and 7 October 2009, on the re-establishment of the degree of Master of Music (Reporter, p. 74).

2. Topic of concern: The installation of a lift in the University Combination Room without the approval of the Regent House by Grace (Reporter, p. 60).

Notice of a benefaction

26 October 2009

The Vice-Chancellor gives notice that she has received with gratitude a benefaction of £100,000 from Dr Nikos Theocarakis, in memory of his wife Catherine Grigoriou-Theocarakis, to support the study of Modern Greek in the University. A part of this sum, £8,000, will be used to provide a permanent Prize for the best overall result in Modern Greek in Part Ib or Part II of the Modern and Medieval Languages Tripos. The remainder will be available to be used over five years to support the advancement of Modern Greek Studies.

The Council is submitting a Grace to the Regent House (Grace 1, p. 117) for the approval of regulations to govern the proposed Catherine Grigoriou-Theocarakis Prize.

Office of Deputy High Steward: Notice

20 October 2009

In accordance with Statute D, V, 2, the High Steward, Dame Bridget Ogilvie, DBE, Sc.D., Honorary Fellow of Girton College and of St Edmund’s College, has appointed Mrs Anne Mary Lonsdale, CBE, M.A., Honorary Fellow of New Hall, and formerly Pro-Vice-Chancellor, to the office of Deputy High Steward, with effect from 1 November 2009, by Letters Patent in the place of the Right Honourable Lord Richardson of Duntisbourne, KG, who has resigned.

The Letters Patent take the following form:

KNOW ALL PERSONS by these Presents that I Bridget Margaret Ogilvie High Steward of the University of Cambridge for the trust and confidence which I repose in Anne Mary Lonsdale HAVE ordained constituted and appointed AND DO by these Presents and with effect from the first day of November in the year two thousand and nine ordain constitute and appoint the said Anne Mary Lonsdale to the office of DEPUTY HIGH STEWARD of the said University with full power and authority to act in all matters causes and controversies appertaining to the Office of Deputy High Steward and the responsibilities thereof according to Law and Right and according to the Statutes Ordinances Usages and Privileges of the said University To hold exercise and enjoy the said Office with all the rights and privileges authority and power in any respect incident or belonging to the same unto the said Anne Mary Lonsdale

In testimony whereof I have here unto set my hand and seal this twentieth day of October two thousand and nine.

Bridget Ogilvie

 

The Development of the University’s land in North West Cambridge: Notice by the Council

26 October 2009

1. Project background

The issues of development of the land at North West Cambridge have been under consideration by the University for two decades or more. During the summer of 2009 the independent Planning Inspectors agreed that the University’s needs merit the removal of this significant parcel of land from the Green Belt. As set out in the Council’s Second and Third Reports (Reporter, 2003–04, p. 149 and 2004–05, p. 513), the range of uses to be provided for in the planning of the site comprise:

• housing to address the recruitment and retention problems of staff: an indicative provision of 2,500 units, half to be affordable housing for University and College staff, with the remainder for sale in the open market in order to fund infrastructure on the site and the affordable housing

• student accommodation: Collegiate units for up to 2,000 students (undergraduate and postgraduate)

• academic and University-linked private research space: having regard to planned and potential development at West Cambridge, provision to be sought for a minimum of 100,000 sq.m. of research space on the site.

As set out in the Fourth Report (Reporter, 2007–08, p. 613) the guiding principle is that the release of part of the site for market housing will mean that no investment from other University sources will be required although it is not expected that the overall development will release capital for other purposes.

2. Progress since the Fourth Report of 17 March 2008 (Reporter, 2007–08, p. 613)

The Strategy Committee under the chairmanship of Mr Alexander Johnston and the Executive Group under the chairmanship of the Registrary have been meeting regularly to advance the objectives of the University with reference to its land holding at North West Cambridge. As the Council noted in its Notice of 7 January 2008 (Reporter, 2007–08, p. 392), the University sought the inclusion of its proposals for development of its North West Cambridge site in the draft Area Action Plan (AAP) prepared jointly by the City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council. The draft document was submitted for examination on 19 May 2008 and, following a period of public consultation, the draft AAP was submitted by the local authorities in June 2008, on a basis however that did not reflect the University’s Easter 2008 Emerging Master Plan. Whilst there were substantial areas of agreement with the local authorities’ proposals, the principal difference related to the more restrictive development boundaries proposed in the draft AAP, which it was considered would result in the number of residential units falling significantly below the desired 2,500 residential units. Consequently within the public consultation period for the draft AAP running from 8 September to 20 October 2008, objections were lodged on behalf of the University, which together with others were the subject of consideration at the Examination Hearing in public before independent Inspectors appointed by the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government which commenced on 25 November 2008. The purpose of the Hearing was to examine the ‘soundness’ of the draft AAP in terms of town planning and consider the various objections.

3. The AAP Hearing in Public  

At the Hearing, the Inspectors considered the draft under a number of topics, referred to as ‘Main Matters’:

  1. The Need for the Development by the University of Cambridge
  2. The Viability and Mix of Development
  3. Green Belt, Footprint, and Strategic Open Space
  4. Housing Trajectory and Phasing
  5. Monitoring
  6. Traveller’s Rest Pit Site of Special Scientific Interest
  7. Climate Change and Sustainable Design
  8. Travel
  9. Other matters (Education, Road Access, Household Recycling Centre, and Supermarket).

After hearing evidence and discussions on Main Matters 1–3 and making a site inspection, the Inspectors suggested that the local authorities should consider revisions to the development site boundaries in the AAP that

(i)would extend it to the north-west, along the M11, to accord with the University’s Master Plan boundary,

(ii)narrow the central Green Belt area (the ‘Girton Gap’),

(iii)include an area (edged red on the attached plan, p. 94) adjacent to the ‘Park and Ride’ site that had been included within the draft AAP footprint but excluded from the University’s Master Plan area on ecological grounds.

The overall effect of these changes increased the development site footprint in the draft AAP from 72.6 ha to 91 ha, compared to the University’s Master Plan footprint of 82.6 ha.

The local authorities advised that this would require further public consultation of a revised draft AAP and agreed that the other ‘Main Matters’ should be dealt with as far as possible at the Hearing, with the revised draft, any outstanding matters, and any subsequent objections dealt with at a later, final, day of Hearing. As a result the final day of Hearing was held on 9 June 2009 when consequences of the extended development boundaries were considered relative to traffic, the central open space, a supermarket, the University’s needs, and financial viability. In the intervening period it had been agreed between the local authorities and the University that the residential unit capacity of the enlarged site footprint would be 3,000 units.

4. The Inspectors’ Report

The report of the Inspectors Mr Cliff Hughes and Mr Terry Kemmann-Lane on the Examination into the North West Cambridge Area Action Plan was published on 24 August 2009 (http://www.nwcambridge.co.uk/NWCAAP%20report%20FINAL.pdf). The Inspectors found the amended AAP sound, subject to a number of changes which are binding on the City Council and South Cambridgeshire District Council. The amended AAP was adopted by the local authorities on 22 October. There is now a six-week period for legal challenge, on narrowly defined grounds, under section 113 of the Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004.

The principal changes required by the Inspectors are:

• that the AAP should include an explanation that the University has established the need for the land to be allocated for the development

• clarification of the requirement to establish need with individual planning applications

• enlargement of the Major Development Site to the west and reducing the extent of the central open area, resulting in a development footprint of 91 ha

• the new Green Belt boundary to follow the north-west development edge (broken green line on the attached plan)

The Inspectors’ Report is structured in line with the Main Matters considered at the Independent Examination, a summary of which is as follows.

(i)Need for development by the University of Cambridge. The Inspectors refer to evidence submitted by the University as to its economic importance, its available land, and requirements with reference to past and projected development rates, the land supply at West Cambridge, and the lack of other substantial and relevant alternative sites. They conclude that there are distinct benefits from bringing the land forward as a development plan allocation at this time, for, although the University will not be insulated from the effects of recession, planning must be for the long term in order to avoid limiting beneficial growth which otherwise might take place. The Inspectors summarize the University’s evidence for housing need and accept that market housing is needed to make the development economically viable. They point out that it is not general housing needs that justifies releasing the land, but the University’s particular needs. The Inspectors conclude that the University’s need for the land to be released for development is a very weighty consideration and that specific wording to that effect should be included in the AAP. They also recommend a change to Policy NW30 (see the City Council’s website: http://cambridge.jdi-consult.net/ldf/readdoc.php?docid=144) to clarify that the strategic need for development has been accepted and that needs statements must be submitted with planning application for specific developments.

(ii)Viability and Mix of Development. The Inspectors support the larger site footprint of 91 ha with capacity for 3,000 dwellings, 2,000 student units, and 100,000 sq.m. of academic and research space and a local centre. The Inspectors consider that 1,250 key worker dwellings is the minimum to aim for and that there is no controversy in the provision of 2,000 student accommodation units. Also, as the only method of funding key worker dwellings by the University is through market housing development, it would not be prudent to proceed on any lesser proportion than 50% for the market housing element and the AAP must go as far as it can towards meeting the needs of the University, particularly with reference to the key worker housing and enabling residential development. It is also prudent for the University to provide for 100,000 sq.m. of academic and research space: the University’s land budget figures are derived from Master Planning work based on a rigorous site analysis and detailed knowledge of the site, which provides a sound evidence basis from which to proceed.

(iii)Green Belt, Footprint, and Strategic Open Space. The Inspectors consider that the land at North West Cambridge has substantial value to the Green Belt setting of the city, due to its prominence from the M11, its relationship to the city, and its attractive qualities. However the University’s needs are of greater weight than the Green Belt functions and there are exceptional circumstances for removing land from the Green Belt to accommodate development. The loss of the extensive sweep of land from the Green Belt causes harm, but this is the case for both the Submission AAP and the University’s proposed site. The Submission AAP was not sound as the western boundary was not supported by a robust and credible evidence base and the development site did not meet the University’s needs. In addition, the University’s proposal does not result in material harm to the setting of Cambridge and with regard to the central open space forming the Girton Gap, this should not be too large bearing in mind the University’s needs. The Inspectors consider the University’s proposed boundaries for that part of the development to be sound. On the effects of combining the inner Green Belt boundary with the development site boundary, the Inspectors conclude that small-scale adjustments to Green Belt boundary could be made through a development plan review following detailed design or that the Green Belt boundary could be marked by landscaping.

(iv)and (v) Housing Trajectory and Phasing/Monitoring. The Inspectors accept that in the present circumstances it is difficult to be confident about delivery of housing units in any one year and that the matter will be kept under annual review through monitoring. The Inspectors’ recommended trajectory shows delivery over a 9-year period starting with 50 units in 2012–13, rising to a peak delivery of 575 units in 2017–18 and completing in 2020–21. Of the 3,000 units, 1,550 units are shown as being delivered in Cambridge City and 1,450 in the South Cambridgeshire administrative areas. The Inspectors recommend various changes to monitoring indicators for the local authorities.

(vi)Traveller’s Rest Pit (Geological) Site of Special Scientific Interest. During the draft AAP process, through investigation with Natural England it became apparent that the current boundaries shown on the plan do not correctly cover the geological deposits requiring protection. A plan has been agreed with Natural England that shows the correct boundaries including 10 m ‘buffer strips’. The Inspectors recommend that the Proposals map is changed to reflect the indicative area of national interest. However there is only a small overlap with the amended development site boundary. Natural England has now commenced the statutory process to effect the boundary changes.

(vii)Climate Change and Sustainable Design. The Inspectors support the application of Code level 5 of the Code for Sustainable Homes from 1 April 2013 and above a threshold of 50 dwellings. Decentralized energy is supported, but the Inspectors consider that the prioritized list within the draft AAP is too prescriptive and should be removed.

(viii)Travel. The Inspectors conclude that the modal share of no more than 40% of trips to work by car should exclude car passengers. Evidence does not point to a harmful increase in congestion on the strategic road network near the site and although development will lead to traffic growth and congestion, the use of the site is preferable to less sustainable locations further from the City. Any harm from congestion is outweighed by the positive features of the proposal, congestion having to be accepted as a result of desirable growth. The Inspectors consider that noise and air quality effects are matters for detailed master planning, working within the overall development footprint of the adopted AAP and that the need for an effective response to these problems requires stronger acknowledgement.

(ix)Other Matters. With regard to education, the Inspectors conclude that it is likely that two primary schools will be required for the scale of residential development proposed, but that a secondary school on the site, which would cater for the wider area of north west Cambridge, would not accord with Structure Plan policy as the valuable land is only being released for University needs and predominantly University-related uses. Regarding road access, the Inspectors note that a link road between Madingley Road and Huntingdon Road has been included in accordance with policy NW14, but conclude that whilst a secondary access on Madingley Road is likely to be required, its location is a matter for Master Planning and it would be misleading to suggest such a location now. With regard to the argument that the draft AAP should include provision of a Household Recycling Centre, the Inspectors concluded that it is not the role of an AAP to include policies for waste. In terms of retail provision, the Inspectors conclude that the definition of a ‘local centre’ in the AAP should be amended to include reference to a ‘small supermarket’ to conform to national planning policy, where such a supermarket is defined as being below 2,500 sq.m. net floor space.

5. Town Planning Progression

Confirmation of the AAP and its adoption by the local authorities will enable discussions to be carried forward with the local authorities’ officers and other agencies relative to refreshing and fixing the Master Plan and subsequently carrying forward the process of submitting an overall outline planning application. Discussions are in hand to establish the process whereby this may happen, including engagement with the University’s professional team and further public consultation on any proposed changes to the Easter 2008 Master Plan leading in due course to the proposed outline planning application for the overall site. Under the confirmed AAP, the land budget (ha) will be as follows:

Housing

51.9

Academic and commercial research

14.6

Student housing

5.0

Hotel / conference facility

1.9

Local centre (including built area for a primary school)

3.8

Open space

8.1

Roads (spine road and orbital route)

5.0

Existing (UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre)

0.7

——

Total

91.0

6. Delivery of the Built Development

In the Fourth Report of the Council it was indicated that the principal activities on the project during 2008–09 would be town and country planning and the arrangements for delivery of the built environment. Also as previously reported a team of professional consultants were engaged for the AAP process and those activities are now complete. Accordingly it was appropriate to undertake full tendering processes through the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) in conjunction with the University’s Head of Purchasing, to enable further consideration of the Master Plan and in due course submission of an overall outline planning application and negotiation of an outline planning consent. As a result, time-limited appointments of the following companies have been made, on the basis of fixed-price fees wherever possible:

Master Planners – EDAW-AECOM with McCreanor Lavington and Wilkinson Eyre

Project managers – Turner and Townsend

Solicitors – Berwin Leighton Paisner

Cost Consultants – Gardiner and Theobald

Public Relations Consultants – Communications Management

Commercial Research consultants – Creative Places/GVA Grimley

In addition, arrangements for interim advice have been made with Peter Brett Associates for advice on engineering including transport and infrastructure, AECOM (Faber Maunsell) for sustainability advice, GVA Grimley for commercial development advice, and Bidwells for market housing advice pending the conclusion of appointments under ongoing OJEU tendering processes.

7. Communications

A new interactive website (http://www.nwcambridge.co.uk/) has been established that provides information on the project and provides links to related websites containing relevant material. There will be further public consultation on any proposed revisions to the Master Plan proposals, followed by a further Report to the University.

8. Governance and Management

The North West Cambridge Strategy Committee under the chairmanship of Mr Alexander Johnson, with its reporting lines to the Finance Committee, and the Executive Group under the chairmanship of the Registrary with accountability in the first instance to the Vice-Chancellor and reporting to the Strategy Committee and through it to the Finance Committee and the Council continue to oversee and set strategic objectives. The Project Director, Mr Roger Taylor, who was appointed in July 2008, now reports to the Registrary rather than to the Director of the Estate Management and Building Service, is a member of the Executive Group, and attends the Strategy Committee. The management process is subject to internal audit and has yet to go before the Audit Committee. Future management proposals will have regard to the conclusions of the Committee.

9. Future Activities

With confirmation of the Inspectors’ Report and the AAP, the Project Director with the appointed professional team has engaged in discussions with the local authorities regarding possible revisions to the Master Plan proposals to take account of the revised development footprint and changed market conditions; public consultation on proposed changes; the process of submitting an overall outline planning application for the site, and the timescale for determination. Subject to progress on discussions relating to any changes proposed, it is anticipated that work on the Master Plan will be put on hold in January 2010 pending publication of a further Report to the University in spring 2010, which will include a description of the revised Master Plan and proposals for outline planning application. The Report will also seek approval for an additional warrant to cover expenditure up to a resolution to grant outline planning consent. Subject to the approval of the recommendations in the Report, it is anticipated that the earliest date for submission of the planning application will be late summer or autumn 2010. It is hoped that detailed engagement with the local authorities through the pre-application period will enable an early resolution to grant consent being secured in early 2011. Depending on the form of the first phase and market conditions, the earliest date for delivery of a first phase of development is therefore likely to be mid-2013.

ANNEX

Previous Reports and Notices

The University’s formal policy for the development of its land holdings in North West Cambridge (the area between Madingley Road, Huntingdon Road, and the M11 motorway) is set out in four Reports:

(i)The First Report of the Council on development of the University’s land in North West Cambridge (Reporter, 1999–2000, p. 724), which was approved by Grace 10 of 26 July 2000, approved proposals to develop an outline medium- to long-term strategy for the north west area of Cambridge and amended an earlier Report (Reporter, 1990–91, p. 637) in order to allocate the North West Cambridge area for development to provide for University housing and future academic needs, support facilities, and University-related knowledge-based research.

(ii)The Second Report of the Council on the development of the University’s land in North West Cambridge (Reporter, 2003–04, p. 149), which was approved by Grace 3 of 4 February 2004, authorized the preparation of a Master Plan for the North West Cambridge in conjunction with the local planning authorities and involving consultation internally and with interest groups and the general public.

(iii)The Third Report of the Council on the development of the University’s land in North West Cambridge (Reporter, 2004–05, p. 513) set out the principles and general nature of the emerging spatial options, which were approved by Grace 6 of 20 April 2005 as a basis for further development of a Master Plan and preparation of submissions to the Cambridge Local Plan Public Inquiry.

(iv)The Council published a Notice on 7 January 2008 (Reporter, 2007–08, p. 392) providing an update on the development and to respond to remarks made in Discussion on 9 October 2007 on the Twelfth Report of the Board of Scrutiny (Reporter, 2007–08, p. 86).

(v)The Fourth Report of the Council on the development of the University’s land at North West Cambridge (Reporter, 2007–08, p. 613), which was approved by Grace 2 of 18 June 2008, approved substitution of the Lent 2008 Emerging Master Plan with the Easter 2008 Emerging Master Plan. The Emerging Master Plan was made available to download as a pdf file (http://www.admin.cam.ac.uk/reporter/2007-08/weekly/6116/report.pdf)

Retrospectivity for the M.Math. and M.A.St. Degree: Notice

26 October 2009

In the Council’s Joint Report with the General Board on the establishment of a degree of Master of Mathematics and a degree of Master of Advanced Study (Reporter, 2008–09, p. 338) the Council proposed, subject to approval of the recommendations in the Report, to promote a Grace that would make it possible for those students who had attained the honours standard in Part III of the Mathematical Tripos from 1962 onwards to supplicate for one of the new degrees. However, because of the number of candidates who might supplicate for the degrees retrospectively, the Council proposed that such candidates should not be allowed to proceed at General Admission.

The recommendations in the Report were approved by Graces 2–4 of 11 March 2009. The amendments to Statute B proposed were approved by Her Majesty the Queen in Council on 15 October. The Council is therefore submitting Graces (Graces 2–4, p. 117) for the approval, with effect from 1 Ocober 2010, of the retrospective award of the M.Math. and M.A.St. to those students who have attained the honours standard in Part III of the Mathematical Tripos since 1962 and to prevent candidates supplicating for those degrees retrospectively from proceeding at General Admission.

Student Numbers 2008–09 (Reporter, Special No. 4): Corrections

TABLE 19. Full-time Overseas (non-British nationals) student numbers by nationality, 2008–09.

A corrected version of this table is published below:

CORRECTED TABLE 19.

(Note: This table is based on nationality and is not equivalent to those paying the overseas rate of University fees.)

Under- graduates

Post- graduates

Totals

Under- graduates

Post- graduates

Totals

Antigua and Barbuda

1

1

Germany

224

279

503

Australia

44

131

175

Greece

28

78

106

Bahamas

1

1

Guatemala

1

1

Bangladesh

2

14

16

Hong Kong

15

30

45

Barbados

3

2

5

Hungary

19

12

31

Belize

1

1

Iceland

6

6

Botswana

1

1

Indonesia

2

4

6

Brunei Darussalam

3

4

7

Iran (Islamic Republic of)

9

20

29

Cameroon

2

2

Iraq

2

1

3

Canada

52

165

217

Ireland

94

99

193

Cyprus

67

35

102

Israel

2

26

28

Ghana

3

13

16

Italy

43

100

143

Guyana

2

2

Japan

30

44

74

India

75

161

236

Jordan

1

1

2

Jamaica

2

2

4

Kazakhstan

7

2

9

Kenya

8

10

18

Korea, Democratic People’s Rep

1

1

Malawi

1

2

3

Korea, Republic of

24

61

85

Malaysia

138

67

205

Kuwait

1

1

Maldives

1

1

Kyrgyzstan

1

1

Malta

2

2

4

Latvia

10

5

15

Mauritius

8

1

9

Lebanon

4

4

New Zealand

20

43

63

Lithuania

21

10

31

Nigeria

9

20

29

Luxembourg

2

4

6

Pakistan

15

37

52

Mexico

3

29

32

Singapore

139

57

196

Moldova, Republic of

3

3

South Africa

14

50

64

Mongolia

2

2

Sri Lanka

24

23

47

Morocco

1

1

St Vincent and the Grenadines

1

1

Myanmar

1

1

Tanzania, United Republic of

1

1

Nepal

7

7

Trinidad and Tobago

11

9

20

Netherlands

35

45

80

Uganda

2

6

8

Norway

7

12

19

Oman

1

1

2

Commonwealth sub-total

644

863

1,507

Panama

1

1

Paraguay

1

1

Afghanistan

1

1

Peru

3

3

Albania

1

3

4

Philippines

1

4

5

Algeria

6

6

Poland

44

49

93

Argentina

2

8

10

Portugal

12

53

65

Armenia

2

2

Republic of Serbia

4

11

15

Austria

17

30

47

Romania

18

17

35

Bahrain

1

2

3

Russian Federation

29

30

59

Belarus

2

4

6

Saudi Arabia

6

6

Belgium

19

23

42

Slovakia

8

5

13

Bhutan

1

1

Slovenia

4

2

6

Bolivia

1

1

Somalia

5

5

Bosnia and Herzegovina

2

2

Spain

27

38

65

Brazil

3

18

21

Sudan

1

2

3

Bulgaria

15

10

25

Sweden

41

22

63

Cambodia

1

1

Switzerland

8

24

32

Cayman Islands

1

1

Syrian Arab Republic

2

1

3

Chile

12

12

Taiwan, Province of China

3

58

61

China

350

337

687

Thailand

32

29

61

Colombia

1

4

5

Turkey

1

19

20

Congo, The Democratic Republic

1

1

Ukraine

17

9

26

Costa Rica

1

1

United Arab Emirates

2

2

Croatia

3

9

12

United States

158

446

604

Czech Republic

10

13

23

Uruguay

1

1

2

Denmark

21

21

42

Uzbekistan

1

1

Ecuador

1

1

Venezuela

4

4

Egypt

3

18

21

Viet Nam

27

12

39

Estonia

7

10

17

Yugoslavia

1

1

Ethiopia

2

2

4

Zimbabwe

3

6

9

Finland

22

11

33

Fmr Yugoslav Rep of Macedonia

5

5

Non-Commonwealth sub-total

1,610

2,392

4,002

France

97

95

192

Grand total

2,254

3,255

5,509

Commonwealth countries classification is as at 1 December 2008.

Unknown Nationality

16

35

51

This table excludes students with British nationality.