VSM Bill to pass
The Education & Science Select Committee has reported back on the VSM Bill.
The Education and Science Committee has examined the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill and recommends by majority that it be passed with the amendments shown.
Yay yay yay. This has been a long time coming. A very good day for freedom and choice, and a bad day for compulsion.
There are a number of changes to the bill. I am pleased to see that they have adopted my suggestion that institutions will still be required to collect fees on behalf of a student association – on a voluntary basis. It would have been impractical for an association to try and solicit memberships itself. This should allow student associations that have a modest fee and provides good services, to still persuade people to join.
The implementation date has changed to be 1 January 2012 – also a change I supported. This give institutions time to modify their enrolment processes and software, and gives associations time to prepare.
My offer at the select committee to work with NZUSA to get a culture and systems change within student associations, so they can maximise membership stands. I have a number of ideas about how associations, and also student media, can attract income, even without compulsory fees.
Congrats to Heather Roy and Roger Douglas for getting select committee agreement.
There may be some fish hooks in the detailed provisions. If so, I’ll blog some possible changes to be considered at Committee of the Whole stage.
September 24th, 2010 at 4:33 pm
But – where will the left wing troughers get their start now?
September 24th, 2010 at 4:37 pm
They were already beign culled by the pass at least 50% of you papers or loose you loan system Right.
Now the unions will actually have to sell themselves and provide services that actually supported by the majority. Not the pet toys of the few who go to univeristy to become politicians.
September 24th, 2010 at 4:38 pm
*like* this post!
Human Rights prevail!
September 24th, 2010 at 4:41 pm
An excellent outcome. The lefties (apprentice LPMP’s) will be spewing!!
September 24th, 2010 at 4:42 pm
Yes! happy! happy!
September 24th, 2010 at 4:47 pm
I already put this out on General debate. So instead of students handing their money over compulsorily to student associations they’ll give it over to university. How is that an improvement?
[DPF: They won't have to give it to the university. The university will collect it from those who wish to join]s
September 24th, 2010 at 4:48 pm
No Jinky they IF they CHOOSE to join they will pay it as part of their fees, not directly to the union.
September 24th, 2010 at 4:49 pm
ahhh suck on that ya commie pricks
September 24th, 2010 at 4:53 pm
Tis a sad day for Salient and other student media.
September 24th, 2010 at 4:53 pm
How very ironic http://www.odt.co.nz/campus/otago-polytechnic/125239/opsa-pullout-discussion-table and from today http://www.odt.co.nz/campus/otago-polytechnic/127878/opsa-out-nzusa not sure of my position on this but had to laugh at the irony of these news items.
September 24th, 2010 at 4:55 pm
I have it on good authority that bill will be amended to allow Universities to take an amount equivalent to current student assoc fee and use it to provide “core services”. same amount taken just a different pickpocket!!
[DPF: Universities already charge $500 or so for services. A small proportion of what SAs provide might transfer to a university, but it should be nowhere near even 50%. The university can not fund NZUSA, student media, political campaigns etc etc. Most SAs spend very little on actual services]
September 24th, 2010 at 4:56 pm
Yayyyy! Is it Christmas already?
Trouble is, those lefty buggers will be in charge by 2012, after the tide comes rushing in on John “Public Domain” Key without ACT. Under urgency, the lefttards will vote this straight out again. What goes round…
September 24th, 2010 at 4:57 pm
DPF, can you please clarify the claim of compulsion? I was told that the various student associations held a vote on whether all would be require to join, or membership would be voluntary. Some voted for compulsion, and some for voluntary. If this is correct, and I do stand to be corrected on this, then the Bill is simply overturning the tyranny of the majority in a duly held election in favour of those who lost the vote?
[DPF: No. First of all the so called votes were about as fair as the recent Iranian elections. Secondly there is no right to decide you will be compulsory - the Automobile Assn can;t vote to make itself compulsory. 51% of my neighbourhood can not vote to make Neighbourhodo Watch compulsory]
September 24th, 2010 at 5:01 pm
“If this is correct, and I do stand to be corrected on this, then the Bill is simply overturning the tyranny of the majority in a duly held election in favour of those who lost the vote?”
You need to be corrected. Students can now join the Association or not as they choose. To say this represents some kind of “tyranny” is a suggestion only a deranged irrational Progressive could make. Pure Stalinist style reversal of political reality.
September 24th, 2010 at 5:30 pm
Damn. Just thinking I should have nominated myself for VUWSA next year. Would have loved to have been sitting on the Exec while they are spewing over the fact they are about to lose 95+% of the money they steal from us to line their pockets. Would have got elected too, I’m pretty sure you only need to get about a dozen votes, less if you’re the only one standing.
September 24th, 2010 at 5:40 pm
Hi David,
Curious to hear how you would further monetise student media?
September 24th, 2010 at 5:40 pm
DPF, with respect, you have not dealt with the question I posed. I remain open to correction, but slagging off the free ballot as Iranian is not an answer, nor is a dubious comparison with the Automibile Association. My question is simple. Was there a vote of students to decide whether membership of their association would be voluntary or complusory? And if that ballot was lost, does not this Bill simply overturn that vote in favour of those who lost that ballot?
September 24th, 2010 at 6:01 pm
@pmofnz
Agree entirely. Delaying to 2012 means it is likely to be knobbled by an incoming left coalition government, which is always a distinct possibility. Danm shame, it’s a piece of legislation which is long overdue.
September 24th, 2010 at 6:03 pm
Thank you to everyone that has helped out with the campaign so far.
Here’s ACT on Campus’s press relese:
http://www.actoncampus.org.nz/blog/human-rights-to-finally-be-restored-on-campus
September 24th, 2010 at 6:04 pm
“My question is simple.”
..and he answered it simply. The vote was fixed, as most leftist “votes” are. Take your self righteous posturing elsewhere. The left have never seen democracy in any way other than as a station on the line to totalitarianism, and its farcical for you to pretend otherwise. Think we came down in the last shower do you? FFS..!!
September 24th, 2010 at 6:19 pm
Redbaiter, thanks for your measured and considered response. So, to clarify, you guys lost the vote, now chose to use the parliament to overturn it? There is a nasty pattern developing in this National ACT government. Legislate to deny a vote on the super city, legislate to remove ECAN and delay the election, now legislate to settle an old score over a ballot you lost on campus. I guess if it sounds like fascism, looks like fascism, and smells like fascism, it might just be fascism.
September 24th, 2010 at 6:20 pm
^^^ I hope this offer is heard and taken up. For DPF of the evil right wing conspiracy to offer these organisations (free??) money-making advice is not something to scoff at.
September 24th, 2010 at 6:37 pm
@Tom Gould
Let me clarify. Your question posed is nonsensical as it is predicated on the vilest of notions, that fundamental human rights do not exist. That by mere whim, a simple majority of people can opt to take the human rights (such as freedom of association) of a minority group by claiming a democratic mandate.
VSM is not a manifestation of fascism. Freedom of association- like many other human rights- are fundamental to a liberal, civilised society. What we have is an issue that ought to be championed by the political left and right. Instead, we are constantly shown by supporters of compulsion the degree to which human rights are mere expedients to political outcomes.
September 24th, 2010 at 6:38 pm
“I guess if it sounds like fascism, looks like fascism, and smells like fascism, it might just be fascism.”
No might about it. Forcing people to fund a political organisation they would rather not have a bar of is fascism true enough. Thankfully National had the balls to ruin the fascists party. Now they won’t get any more of other people’s money to piss up against the wall. Ain’t that a shame.
September 24th, 2010 at 7:11 pm
Tom G
Given you are certain that student unions voted to remain compulsory, perhaps you could provide us with more information.
Including the percentage of students that took part in these referenda. That would be genuinely interesting.
When I was a student, the local association was expert at scheduling votes for times when few students were able to attend, and even fewer were aware a meeting was underway.
September 24th, 2010 at 7:19 pm
Tom Gould.
Actually, the AA comparison is entirely valid. The ACT Party, your local Church, the PPTA can’t hold a vote to then force anyone they want to join them. And the ability for any group to hold such a vote is unfair.
Or would you like to be forced into the ACT Party because most ACT Party members think you should be?
Human rights protect minorities against the tyrrany of the majority. It’s why we are called a Liberal Democracy.
September 24th, 2010 at 7:48 pm
theodoresteel,
TG does not want a Liberal Democracy. He wants a liberal Democracy. A liberal Democracy is one where the liberals – those who know better than the plebs and who are, of course, all university-educated, card-carrying Labour Party members – get to tell everyone else exactly how they are permitted to run their lives. (They are not permitted to not enjoy the experience.)
To challenge this idyll is to be undemocratic (and probably also fascist)
September 24th, 2010 at 8:17 pm
Thank goodness!
I am a former member of a student association (no I will not name it or state the time I was in it) and I am very glad to see this. The way they are structured leads to pettiness, ridiculousness and a very large waste of students money on such things as drinking on conferences. (heavy and unsafe drinking too I might add!). It was also extremely dominated by left wing trainees. I, (at the time) being a naive and unsuspecting right winger and a social conservative was quite shocked at the attitudes displayed blatantly that I felt were not representative of the majority of students nor were displayed to students when the members were voted for!
the bill is not perfect but it is a darn sight better than what we have now.
September 24th, 2010 at 8:55 pm
Tom Tom (that strikes a chord I recall) all this bill does is to remove the compulsion aspect, a students association can still operate, still provide the valuable(as they see it) services but they can no longer enjoy the funding that a compulsory system provides, they have to earn the financial support they want to spend on their political motivated actions of the past neanderthal system and if that is a mystery to you then return to social studies year ten and start again you totalitarian socialist tosser.
BTW dont start the facile argument about the right to opt out, that is rubbish and anyone with a modicum of intelligence understands it is more practical to remove compulsion than to offer a system of opting out with the added hurdles that that entails.
September 24th, 2010 at 10:23 pm
Tom Gould can kiss my now free student balls….;-)
September 24th, 2010 at 10:24 pm
Awwww. Now what will all the good little student unionists and activists do? Start advocating smaller government, perhaps? Stranger things have happened.
September 24th, 2010 at 10:30 pm
I can literally not wait till monday morning when the student rag comes out, and the commie student union journos are in full fucking panic mode.
It is going to be great!
September 24th, 2010 at 10:38 pm
Both our kids will be freed from the VUWSA levy extortion … $139.20 each.
September 24th, 2010 at 10:45 pm
This is truly a great day.
I cannot wait to see how devastated all the poor commies will be, telling tales of “devastation to student services” in the student rag. I almost feel sorry for them.
September 24th, 2010 at 10:51 pm
“I can literally not wait till monday morning when the student rag comes out, and the commie student union journos are in full fucking panic mode.”
^^^ This
I may actually use my lunch break next Monday to walk into the totalitarian socialist enclave of Victoria University to pick up a copy of Salient – propaganda funded through legalised theft; theft whose days will thankfully soon be numbered.
September 24th, 2010 at 11:05 pm
Hm, if we follow the logic of the Labour and Green opinions in the report, Iraqis now have fewer vioting choices. After all, it’s not possible anymore to vote for Saddam…
Good news, thanks DPF for posting this.
September 25th, 2010 at 12:29 am
Good. Now it’s time to re introduce the Employment Contracts Act, minus the Employment Court.
cheers
David Prosser
September 25th, 2010 at 1:42 am
I am pleased to see that they have adopted my suggestion that institutions will still be required to collect fees on behalf of a student association
Er, compulsion, no David? If the point of volunteerism is to allow services to emerge because users value them, isn’t the very same principle applicable to fees collection?
Or is this an example of bending over backwards on one point to get victory where it matters? If so, well done
September 25th, 2010 at 1:43 am
Just watch Phil Goff promise to re-introduce compulsion.
September 25th, 2010 at 2:46 am
He already has ben – it’s in Labour’s minority report.
September 25th, 2010 at 2:51 am
Oh and the university is required to collect the fees on behalf of the union – but only from people who choose to join. It’s just to reduce admin work.
September 25th, 2010 at 7:38 am
Excellent news. A great day for freedom and human rights. A bad day for junior totalitarians and their moronically wrongheaded apologists like Tom Gould. Oh well. Cry me a fucking river…
September 25th, 2010 at 8:41 am
This is very good news. I am a supporter of students associations but this means that people who want to be elected to represent the students; [i.e. those folk who will voluntarily be paying fees] will HAVE to be serious about what they do; they will have to behave responsibly and they will have to actually work to justify their existence. I know that if I go to study again and if the SA can prove its worth – I will gladly pay fees of $100-$300 a year.
September 25th, 2010 at 8:47 am
I am glad to see the end of compulsion. However, I will be interested to see whether the universities are now required to be the providers of any services hitherto funded by students through the students associations, and whether the institutions will be allowed to pass any such costs on to users (the fee maxima regulations appear to prevent that). The cost of being a student may not diminish as far as some students might expect.
Can anyone enlighten me as to whether medical practitioners must be members of NZMA?
September 25th, 2010 at 9:04 am
Can anyone enlighten me as to whether medical practitioners must be members of NZMA?
Can anyone enlighten me as to whether NZMA speaks politically on behalf of it’s members on a wide range of isues far outside medicine?
September 25th, 2010 at 9:26 am
Why not let the students decide? Oh, wait…
September 25th, 2010 at 9:34 am
Scrubone, I don’t know the answer to your question. On the other hand, I don’t see its relevance to the present discussion on “compulsion”.
September 25th, 2010 at 9:38 am
I remember asking one zealot how associations will find it so hard to cope with say, 1,000 members out of 20,000 members when at one stage in their history they managed that just fine.
The answer was that they’d still act as though they were representing the 20,000 and spend their budget accordingly.
If that doesn’t show just how divorced from reality these idiots are, I don’t know what does.
The reality is that you don’t need much more costs than an office, stationary and few things like a phone line to represent students. If you want to run services subsidized by member levies, you need to think very hard about whether they are actually something that’s needed and that thinking is just not happening right now. VSM will force that to happen, and end some of the ridiculous money-go-rounds such as student food banks (gee, wiz what a great idea – funding food for the poor by charging the same poor a levy!).
Worse, services that could happily run at a profit are subsidized.
September 25th, 2010 at 9:42 am
Brian Harmer – seriously, that’s weak dude. You’re going to be crucified here if you keep saying silly things like that.
Stop pretending to be pro-voluntary, it’s perfectly obvious your faking it.
September 25th, 2010 at 12:40 pm
Scrubone, you are a logic free zone, buddy.
What is weak? I asked a question. I didn’t make any arguments.
September 25th, 2010 at 1:16 pm
This makes me very very Happy, and who cares about the NZUSA it is an unelected group of three with a Sexist officer position and it’s organisation no mandate with which to speak on behalf on NZ students seeing as several institutions are saying they have left, suspended annuity and suspended reception of publications.
September 25th, 2010 at 3:04 pm
How come students weren’t asked what they wanted
This should have been put to a student referendum
As usual democracy does not exist.
Its only politicians making an issue here
Particularly Roger Douglas. His right hand man at the helm wants to close public libraries.
These guys need to be kept well away from the public purse.
Fortunately that now seems the case.
September 25th, 2010 at 3:12 pm
Hahaha…
Wikiriwhis business…
Students are being asked what they want. And they’re going to be able to make that choice individually themselves.
What you mean is, why can’t a majority tell the minority what to do.
That’s because we belive in human rights. Such a shame that Labour and the Greens don’t.
Would you support deciding whether to kill everyone over the age of 60 by a majority vote? Or do you think people over the age of 60 have human rights that can’t be overridden by majority decision?
September 25th, 2010 at 3:26 pm
Two Act politicians who have nothing what so ever with the tertiary sector dictate their agenda.
How does that work.
The govt is happy to have a referendum over MMP.
Phil Goff said the people decided back in the 50′s against capital puninishment.
MMP is roughly 20 yrs old and the govt wants the people to talk already.
They ignored the people when it came to the post offices, homosexual law reform bill, anti smacking law.
But the govts referendums are binding.
Human rights is about asking.
September 25th, 2010 at 3:34 pm
Asking a group or an individual? If I am OK with human rights, does that mean I can kill off 49% of the population before I have done anything wrong?
September 25th, 2010 at 4:37 pm
Why don’t wb and scrubone get that they are being asked what they want? Every one of them is invited to express what they want. They do that by joining, or not joining. They are just no longer free to compel unwilling participants.
September 25th, 2010 at 7:35 pm
Reasonably simple Brian. Because that doesn’t align with their pre-existing thought patterns. Remember, everything that ACT suggest must be opposed, because ACT are evil baby eating fascists. Since ACT originally proposed this, it must be bad. Also, the compulsion tends to favour the left, and it is status quo. Changing the status quo in a way that impacts on the left must be bad, irrespective of the arguments for and against.
The thing that people on the left don’t or won’t understand, is that deciding to join a student union should be the same as any other decision to join a club – a decision that individuals make, allowing them to vote with their feet. Not a decision that should be made by “the collective” on behalf of everyone.
The NZMA is an interesting example. Of course, the rationale for the NZMA to be compulsory is that it fulfills a regulatory purpose as well as a union/club purpose, that has long been seen to justify its existence. There are many (I’m one of them) who would suggest that the regulatory purpose is being used to hide protectionism, in which existing doctors band together to raise barriers to new doctors.
September 25th, 2010 at 10:34 pm
I love how removing the ability to use force and compulsion against non-consenting others is claimed by the uses of same force and compulsion to be a violation of THEIR right to use said force and compulsion against the non consenting others….as if they actually HAD such a right in the first place.
Leftys…you couldn’t make them up and have them appear credible…
Particularly Roger Douglas. His right hand man at the helm wants to close public libraries.
These guys need to be kept well away from the public purse.
If you can mount a case for retaining public libraries funded by force when private leanding”libraries” like Video Ezy,United Video,McEntees,Hire Pool,Carlton Party Hire etc etc can manage just find by offering their service on a free market to people only too happy to pay for it willingly then please do so.
The fact is Roger and Rodney need letting at the public purse ASAP…to close it up and return the funds to us….the people they actually belong to.
September 29th, 2011 at 5:00 pm
Ahhh what a fun day of asking gloomy union reps why they hate freedom.