WTF!!!- Rudd to bring back compulsory Study Unionism in 2009!!!

[cara.mel]

at least he's brave enough to advertise it

[costargh]

Yeh I was just kind of stirring shit up, I don't agree with VSU but I don't really care that much. Besides, I realise this forum is for people to advertise and gloat about their enter score and how intelligent they are. At least no one is advertising something embarrasing, like I don't know,
liking High School Musical.

I dont like HSM

I LOVE IT FUCKER

[Jrose]

I dont like HSM

I LOVE IT FUCKER
[/quote]

cmon Costargh, get your head in the game

[brendan]

There is a good argument VSU, but it is hardly ever made.
The typical and flawed argument against VSU made by those like Jrose stem from the fact that VSU gives students what they want rather than what Jrose (and the NUS) thinks they ought to want. He knows this, otherwise there would be nothing to worry about.

[bubble sunglasses]

  

There is a good argument VSU, but it is hardly ever made.
The typical and flawed argument against VSU made by those like Jrose stem from the fact that VSU gives students what they want rather than what Jrose (and the NUS) thinks they ought to want. He knows this, otherwise there would be nothing to worry about.

   Did you mean to say "There is a good argument against VSU"? If so, what is it?

[brendan]

  

There is a good argument VSU, but it is hardly ever made.
The typical and flawed argument against VSU made by those like Jrose stem from the fact that VSU gives students what they want rather than what Jrose (and the NUS) thinks they ought to want. He knows this, otherwise there would be nothing to worry about.

   Did you mean to say "There is a good argument against VSU"? If so, what is it?

http://www.cis.org.au/issue_analysis/ia62/IA62.pdf
http://andrewnorton.info/category/higher-education/

I think the crucial question to ask is:

Why should taxpayers be subsidizing either explicitly or implicitly (people not paying their HECS and that they receive an interest subsidy i.e. the govt could have lent out money at commercial interest rates rather than lend it at 0 real interest rate) higher education?

[brendan]

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=8161

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, then chances are it probably is a duck.

No matter how much the Rudd Government tries to deny it, the recently announced plan to allow universities to impose a compulsory amenities fee of up to $250 on students is an attempt to sneak compulsory student unionism in through the backdoor. Perhaps they are hoping that if they can just do it quietly enough nobody will notice that this breaks the promise made before the last election that no such tax would be introduced.

The fact that a student won’t be forced to formally join their university’s student union will be of little comfort when they see their hard-earned $250 handed over to the union to spend on services they may not want or need, or in support of political causes they may not agree with. The imposition of a compulsory union fee infringes a student’s right to freedom of association just as surely as compulsory union membership.
Advertisement

It is also disingenuous to claim, on the one hand, that the new fees will not be used for political purposes but to acknowledge, at the same time, that the money can be used to fund student representation. It is simply not possible to draw a clear dividing line between the two. The attempt to impose a “non-political services only” limit under the voluntary student representation model introduced in Victoria in 1993 showed only that student politicians have a prodigious talent for finding ways to neatly side-step these types of restrictions in their rush to continue channelling money towards their pet political projects.

The line between “political purposes” and “student representation” is, at best, a blurry one. An acceptable “student representation” use of this new compulsory fee would surely be to pay campus affiliation fees to the National Union of Students which is, after all, the “peak representative body of all tertiary students in Australia”? The myth of a clear dividing line is, however, laid bare by a quick glance at the NUS web-site, which openly claims that “activism is at the heart of student representation”.

The NSW State President expands on this, letting us know that “the NUS runs many different campaigns at the cutting edge of progressive social change in Australia”, including “actively campaigning against global warming”, “campaigning with active womyn’s [sic] groups” and “NUS queer campaigns”.

Such political activism is true to form and comes as no surprise. Student unions across the country have a track record of spending student money on favoured political causes, with examples including funding being provided to the Palestine Liberation Organisation and the Communist Party of Malaya or, more recently, $10,000 being spent on a referendum seeking to have a university campus declared a “refugee safe haven”.

Why should students be forced to give money to political causes they may not support and that make no direct contribution to the quality of their education?

Of course, many of the activities provided by student unions do directly benefit students. The $163,459 that the UWA Student Guild spent last year on social activities such as O-Day, O-Camp, and bringing bands on to campus, no doubt made for a great campus atmosphere. I’m sure that students also appreciated the discount drinks in the Uni Tavern and the VIP entries to various hip n’ happenin’ clubs around town. I’m just not sure why the student busy studying in the university library or the student working in a part-time job to pay his own way through university should be forced to pay for the cheap drinks enjoyed by other students.

Voluntary student unionism has the advantage of making student unions more responsive to the needs of their members. If student unions know they can bank on receiving compulsory amenities fees year in and year out what incentive is there for them to actually listen to students and respond to student needs? No matter how badly they perform they’ll still receive the money.

On the other hand, a system based on voluntary contributions requires them to work to attract membership and to convince students that they represent good value for money. Voluntary student unionism means that student unions can’t just take students, or their money, for granted.

It is important to remember that voluntary student unionism doesn’t stop students from joining a student union or from financially supporting the services that student unions provide. It just lets students make that choice for themselves.

As much as the Rudd Government may try to dress it up and hide its true nature, the plan for a compulsory amenities fee is a plan to take that choice away from students. It is the re-introduction of compulsory student unionism in everything other than name.

[brendan]

Student Unions angry over fee proposal
http://www.theage.com.au/national/students-angry-over-fee-proposal-20090220-8cqe.html

"Unis get the fee, students get the services but student unions get screwed," - National Union of Students president David Barrow

No surprise here really, that Student Unions care first and foremost about themselves rather than students.

[Mao]

wait, so there are now compulsory fees again?! I don't have the money to pay that =S

[squance]

I already paid $90 for my student union membership this year. I don't wanna pay up to $250!!

[enwiabe]

No surprise here really, that Student Unions care first and foremost about themselves rather than students.

I think that is a rather illogical conclusion to arrive at based on that article alone, see further:

"Despite his disappointment, Mr Barrow urged the Senate to pass the laws, which he said would secure services that were now being paid for out of university teaching and learning budgets, and which could be cut as institutions tightened their belts in the economic downturn."

He's disappointed that the student unions are getting left out (rightly so, he represents them) but he's still saying to pass it because it will help students...

:-/

[brendan]

But whose interests is he most concerned with first and foremost? Who is his no.1 priority? Student Unions.

No surprise here really, that Student Unions care first and foremost about themselves rather than students.

[/0]

Did you know Rudd is the first chinese prime minister of australia?