Editorial - An attack on student unions PDF Print E-mail
Sunday, 16 May 2010 11:47

Roger Douglas has reared his ugly head with another attack on unions. The free-market fanatic is getting tired though and he’s picked what he hopes is a weak target – students.

His usual right-wing blather about individual freedom and responsibility is used to cover up a much simpler motive - destroying student unions.

Douglas’ misleadingly named Education (Freedom of association) Bill will revoke the right of students to decide the fate of their own organizations, force them to pay even more to university management, and deprive them of vital services and representation.
Despite the justified feeling of some students that the union executives are inept and amateurish, we need to look deeper to see their enduring value and the central role student unions can play in defending public education.
Douglas’ bill seeks to undermine student unions by cutting off the influx of members.
Under the present system, students are automatically a member of their association when they enrol at a university.
People who suffer financial hardship or who are ideologically opposed to unions to membership may opt out. However, the levies of ideological opponents must still be paid, but to a charity of their choice.
Individual associations have the ability to switch to an ‘opt-in’ system through a referendum which must be called if 10% of students sign a petition for that purpose. Douglas’ bill removes this choice from associations, and forced them to become ‘opt-in’.  
Three clear results can be predicted. Firstly, income will plummet. The loss of revenue from membership dues will mean a rapid financial crippling of student unions. They will be unable to run their services with the reduced income.
Secondly, administration costs will rise. Unions will suddenly have to make sure that only their members are able to use student union facilities, requiring, for example, ID checks at the doors of student-run gyms, as well as all the paperwork needed to administrate such a system.
Thirdly, advertising costs will rise. The unions will be forced to put a large part of their reduced finances into advertising and trying to entice students to join the union.
Voluntary student unionism (VSU) was passed in Australia by the Liberals in 2006, despite widespread protest by student unions themselves. The results of this in just a few short years have been devastating. Funding has fallen by almost 95%, over 1000 jobs have been lost, with more losses expected. 36% of unions have been forced to stop all maintenance of their facilities, meaning that they will be practically useless in time to come. Nationally, 261 vital services, such as childcare and assistance for international students have been shut down. Half of all sporting groups have been forced into university management, setting them up for the same fee rises and cost-cutting that uni management has done so well in education for the past 20 years. Price rises within the unions have outstripped inflation, and in some cased have doubled, meaning students are again cut off from services that were previously freely available. And in the end, due to services being taken over by the profit-mongering universities, the increase in fees has more than consumed any financial gain by students no longer paying union dues. In the end, the effect is clear, students are now paying much, much more for far, far less.
Student Unions are vitally important because they provide essential services and are one of the best platforms to push for political activity. In the 1980s, student activism was a perpetual thorn in Roger Douglas’ side, and students were at the forefront of the movements against the US invasion of Vietnam and the 1981 Springbok tour. Student unions provided lively forums for organising and discussion. In France in 2006, student associations were able to lead a massive protest movement that defeated a pro-business employment law. The students’ organisations were able to coordinate nationwide action that drew support from right across the French working class.
It is true that student activism is at a historic low in New Zealand and this is reflected in the poor calibre of student politicians, who too often seem more interested in petty, bureaucratic infighting than representing students’ interests. It is too easy for the university management to co-opt or sideline student politicians, and student activists should be wary of getting too involved.
However, despite our criticism of student politicians, we support the associations wholeheartedly.
We do not abandon trade unions in the downturn, as we see them as being vital to defending workers’ living standards. Similarly, we cannot abandon student unions, if we hope to see students once again taking their fate into their hands and fighting for free education and progress on a national stage.
Unfortunately, the problems with the state of student unions are precisely why this issue has come up now. The Student Associations cannot, in their present state, put together a movement strong enough to stop the government in its tracks. While there is no guarantee that the bill will pass – National seems to be supporting it only as lip-service to ACT, this is an issue largely out of our hands.
What we can do, however, is build to prevent it happening again. We need to take a renewed strength into student unions, to actually make them act as unions. We need to make students understand that the university is a powerful, multi-million dollar company, and if we want to hope to fight against them, fight against fee rises, fight against staff cuts, we have to organise together in student unions.
James G