An email, sent to all students of Robinson College, in which college Financial Tutor Martin Reavley called for Cambridge’s Vice-Chancellor (VC) to step down was sent deliberately, Varsity can reveal.

In a message sent on Tuesday to all Fellows, Undergraduates and Graduates of the college, Reavley said VC Leszek Borysiewicz was “no longer the man for the job” following the result of the EU referendum two weeks ago.

His email was swiftly followed by another from Robinson’s Warden, David Yates, who suggested the initial email had been an accident. Yates wrote that Reavley did not “intend to involve the student members of the College in this expression of his views.”

Reavley has confirmed to Varsity, however, that he fully intended his email – which was addressed to Yates – to be seen by the whole student body of Robinson.

He said: “to be clear, my original email was not sent to the Robinson student body (graduate and undergraduate) by mistake”, and added: “It was my intention to send my email to all members of the University in Robinson whether or not they were in statu pupillari.”

In his email, Reavley, whose role within Robinson College is to assist students with financial matters, said: “Now is not the time to be talking to the University about maintaining the status quo.  Now is the time to be reminding us all that Cambridge is already a global player with a world reputation and is better placed than most to take full benefit from the geopolitical changes that the referendum is clearly ushering in.”

He highlighted also the strength of Cambridge’s finances, and the opportunities that being the richest university in the country could present.

“For an institution with the track record and the deep pockets of Cambridge“, he wrote, “the current period of major uncertainty is a great time in which to steal a march on our weaker rivals and be out front when the dust finally does settle.”

Borysiewicz has released several statements in the aftermath of the referendum result, first conveying that he was “disappointed” on the day of the result. In the email to which Reavley responded, he provided reassurances that EU students matriculating up to and including the 2017 intake would continue to pay the same fees as Home students – currently £9,000 a year.

The University of Cambridge VC’s statement did not make much reference to how the University would tackle any future challenges thrown up by Brexit, simply saying “Work is underway to consider how best to communicate internal developments with specific members of the University.”

In contrast, some other universities more clearly addressed plans for the future in their post-referendum statements. Among these was University of Manchester VC Dame Nancy Rothwell, who said she was “determined to use all the University's networks, contacts and influence” to facilitate partnerships in Europe.

She added that “Our immediate priority right now must be to reaffirm our position as a global University and to come together across the University community to provide support for staff, students and collaborators who are affected in different ways by the referendum vote.”

In the week leading up to the referendum, Cambridge security expert Ross Anderson said that leaving the EU could cost the University in excess of £100 million a year. Dame Athene Donald, Master of Churchill College, predicted Brexit could have a “very significant negative effect on UK science”, and said that a significant amount of research funding comes from the EU.

Reavley told Varsity: “I make no comment on whether or not Brexit is wise. The decision has been made by the country. My comment is about the University's reaction to that decision.”

Some members of Robinson College spoke to Varsity about their concerns following the referendum result, and Reavley’s email.

Robinson’s Access Officer, Emily Fishman, said: “last week's referendum result perpetuated an atmosphere of fear and uncertainty for access. Mr Reavley's argument is indeed refreshing amongst much of the post-Brexit negativity, yet his comments regarding the VC were reckless. I think it is important to respect EU students’ feelings about Brexit and address their concerns – rather than exacerbating an already uncertain situation.”

An EU student at Robinson, who wished to remain anonymous, said: “The Financial Tutor has been very understanding in the past. However, his strongly-worded protest to the Vice-Chancellor’s message of reassurance is deleterious to the many EU students at Robinson, and betrays an unhealthy attitude to development initiatives. This has been a time of great uncertainty for us, and so our fate should not be relegated in favour of strategies to revolutionise Cambridge.”

“The Warden’s continued reassurance,” they added, “despite the Financial Tutor’s message, comforts me greatly, and better reflects the majority attitude to the referendum’s result in Robinson: political affiliation aside, Robinson has expressed commitment to EU students in this difficult time.”

Another Robinson student took issue with the “aggressively hyper-political tone of the e-mail,” in response to what they said “seemed to many a harmless, reassuring statement from the VC.”

Reavley told Varsity he endorsed “the University's efforts to provide reassurance”, but added: “change requires more than reassurance. There is a need for positive ideas about how the university may have confidence in the future.”

A spokesperson for the University said they had “Nothing to add to the story”.