Kiwiblog

If I was running NZUSA, I’d be focused on what changes are needed for student associations (and NZUSA) need to make, to prosper under VSM – rather than still fighting a battle which has been lost.

NZUSA has just had their January conference, and a number of people have been kind enough to send me their documents. Act on Campus have already blogged on these, including the $77,000 lost NZUSA made in 2009.

New Zealand has eight universities and 20 polytechnics/technology institutes.

Currently 14 of those 28 institutions have a student association that is a member of NZUSA, of which only 12 are full members. Those 12 full members represent only 84,000 EFTS. But even that low level, may get smaller.

No fewer than nine student associations have gien notice of withdrawal – they are OPSA, AS@U, SAWIT, WITSA, WSA, OUSA, ASA, EXMSS and MUSA. They represent almost 50,000 ETS, which would leave NZUSA representing – well basically Victoria, Lincoln and Waikato only (plus a couple of minors).

I hope NZUSA do survive, but if they do not, then it would create an opportunity for alternate representation to emerge nationally.

It occurs to me that a professionally run organisation that focused purely on lobbying the Government on behalf of students on core education and welfare issues, and communicated directly with students about its advocacy on their behalf could well get say 30% of students willing to tick a box at enrolment to join it for $5. That should be enough to have a budget of $300,000 or so. Rather than have the lobbying done by a succession of Labour student politicians, you’d actually have a professional executive director who could work with all Governments, and over time could build up a very high regard.

Okay imagine you are NZUSA. Your source of income is about to be cut off. Your best hope of surivival is to appeal to National MPs not to continue their support for the VSM bill.

So after hours of brain-storming, what do you come up with as the best way to convince National they are wrong.

You get the Maritime Union to put out a press release stating their support for compulsory membership, and demand National drop the bill.

Yes that should do it.

I can’t think of anything more likely to convince any doubting MPs in National they should support the bill, than having the Maritime Union speak out on the virtues of compulsory membership.

It’s like getting Graeme Burton to come out against the three strikes law. Fail.

Oh this really is getting sad. NZUSA have spent some of their compulsory given fees on a poll, which they claim has 77% of NZers opposed to Heather Roy’s VSM bill.

NZUSA claim:

Public poll reveals overwhelming majority opposed to Act Party bill

It of course reveals no such thing

The New Zealand public has again overwhelmingly declared that students themselves should determine the method of students’ association membership, a week out from the committee stage of a Bill that attempts to remove this choice.

“Students are best placed to make their own decisions about the membership of their local students’ associations, and this public poll shows there is no appetite for Government involvement in such processes,” says NZUSA co-President David Do.

Mr Do is of course also the former Chair of the Princes St Labour Branch.

But turning to what he says, here is the hypocrisy. It is purely due to Government involvement that student associations are currently compulsory.

Without an Act of Parliament allowing them to be compulsory, student associations would have no more ability to be compulsory, that Neighbourhood Watch. Their compulsion comes from the Government.

An independent public opinion poll revealed 77% of respondents felt that students should decide the structure of membership of their associations, compared with just 17% that believed it was the Government’s decision, and 6% who were unsure.

George Orwell’s 1984 characters would be proud. Instead of asking the public whether student associations should have compulsory membership, or even asking whether students at a particular instistution should have the power to make their association compulsory, they asked a meaningless question about “decide the structure of membership”.

For NZUSA to claim this as demonstrating that there is an overwhelming majority opposed to Heather Roy’s bill, is desperate and ridiculous. Their remaining credibility is draining away even faster than student associations are withdrawing their memberships of NZUSA.

I am a 100% supporter of VSM. However if I was polled and asked “Do you think students should determine the structure of membership of their association” I would answer “yes”. In fact I am amazed that NZUSA did not get 100% of people answering yes.

Likewise if you asked who should determine the structure of membership of Federated Farmers – farmers or the Govt, I would answer farmers. If you asked me should a majority of farmers be able to make Federated Farmers compulsory, I would answer no.

The last vestige of compulsory unionism will die early in 2011. It is long overdue.

NZPA report:

Wellington students are having a party on Wednesday to highlight what could be lost if ACT’s Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill passes.

Oh this is too good to be true. They are going to spend compulsorily acquired money on a party to protest they will not be able to force students to fund their parties in the future.

On Wednesday student radio station the VBC 88.3FM would host a gig at the San Francisco Bath House to highlight concerns that the bill would gut funding to students’ associations and clubs like the VBC.

The gig was organised by the VBC, the Victoria University of Wellington Students’ Association (VUWSA) and the New Zealand Union of Students’ Associations (NZUSA). Bands Glass Vaults, Jetsam Isles and Albert Mikoaj would play.

Oh how nice of NZUSA to help out.

VUWSA President Max Hardy said the bill would cripple the VBC.

“Wellingtonians have enjoyed the support VBC provides to local Wellington music culture through giving local bands air time and holding regular gigs. It’s important they know the student radio station could be at risk due to the government’s actions.”

A little history lesson is needed here. Radio Active is a very popular and successful radio station in Wellington. It has around 45,000 listeners. It was owned by VUWSA but they ran it so incompetently it mae huge losses and almost bankrupted them.

In 198993 it was sold to some of the staff, and it has been very successful ever since – and with no compulsory fees.

For some unknown reasons VUWSA decided it was competent to become a broadcaster again and in 20076 set up VBC, and both VUWSA and the university itself subsidise it. god knows why – it certainly shows that universities have too much money, if they use taxpayer money to fund a radio station.

If one did a survey of students, I suspect you would find far far more listen to Radio Active than VBC.

The Herald talks government funding cuts:

Predictably enough, Labour has tried to make a mountain out of the Government’s announcement of funding cuts in the Education Ministry. According to its education spokesman, Trevor Mallard, these will harm education quality because there will be less research and less teacher and curriculum development.

In reality, he is talking about a molehill. The ministry has been asked to make just $25 million in savings by 2012-13. That is a surprisingly small amount, which is being sought in the right area, rather than at what used to be called the chalkface.

All government-funded organisations are being told to cut costs because of the tough economic climate. Cue cries of anguish and alarm.

The key to achieving the savings without fulfilling the grim forecasts of these critics lies in targeting areas that will not disrupt a sector’s core responsibilities. Commendably, this is what the Government is seeking to achieve in both education and health, two of the leading recipients of its spending.

Labour has never met a spending cut they didn’t oppose.

The Dominion Post swipes at NZUSA:

The University Students Association is to be applauded for its egalitarian instincts. They accord with the New Zealand ethos.

However, the association, long a training ground for Labour Party apparatchiks, would enhance its credibility if it spent less time bleating about the cost of university studies and more focusing on the quality of the education on offer.

It makes a habit of engaging its mouth before its brain. The most recent instance occurred on Tuesday when co-presidents David Do and Pene Delaney issued a statement condemning new Tertiary Education Minister Steven Joyce, the Government’s tyre-kicker-in-chief, for saying that from 2012 a percentage of the state funding provided to tertiary institutions will be linked to their academic performance and for adding that he’d also like to restrict student loans to students who pass their courses.

David Do is a former Chair of Princes St Labour.

Here is a newsflash for the association: the quality of the education available to its members, and students at other tertiary institutions, has gradually been eroded over the past couple of decades by underfunding and a bums-on seats-policy that rewards institutions according to the number of students enrolled rather than their performance.

The Government does not have a magic pool of money into which it can dip to make up the shortfall. It is effectively borrowing $200 million a week to maintain existing levels of public services, debt that will eventually have to be made good by the the association’s members and generations yet unborn.

If improvements are to be made to the system, the money has to come from within the existing tertiary education budget. Mr Joyce is doing exactly what the association should be imploring him to do – looking for poor-quality institutions and courses so that money can be redirected from them to institutions and courses that provide value for money.

He is proposing to do the same with students. Good on him. Every student who is not turning up to class, repeatedly failing or using a student allowance or loan to subsidise a lifestyle that has nothing to do with study is wasting money that could otherwise be used to provide a better education for students motivated to make the most of their opportunities.

The association should forget about trying to score political points and focus on advancing its members’ real interests. Students should ask themselves whether they would rather buy a clapped-out jalopy with a wound-back odometer for $25,000 or a modern, reliable warranted vehicle for $35,000.

Mr Joyce knows the answer to that question. It is to buy a quality vehicle that will stand the test of time. The same holds true for education. Forget cheap; think quality.

A wonderful editorial.

The Press talks immigration:

Graven on a tablet within the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty in New York is the poem with the famous words “give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses”. The latest immigration policy development in New Zealand is somewhat different to this. The new temporary retirement immigration category is more a case of New Zealand being given and welcoming elderly migrants, provided they have enough money to invest here.

Under this scheme foreigners aged at least 66 years can move to New Zealand on an initial two-year permit if they have good health and character, agree to invest $750,000 here, have an income of $60,000 and $500,000 worth of assets.

By international standards the financial criteria for coming here are not huge, which might encourage a reasonable uptake. But even if this did occur the amount which must be invested is also comparatively modest, which suggests that the scheme might not make the contribution to economic growth which the Government hopes would occur.

Rather than encouraging the wealthy elderly to come to our shores, the focus should be on promoting New Zealand as a migration destination for younger people with skills. This would help address this nation’s serious skills shortage and contribute more meaningfully to economic growth.

I don’t think it is an either-or. One can encourage both.

And the ODT focuses on regional rates:

A rare piece of good news emerged for beleaguered ratepayers this week: the Otago Regional Council draft annual plan shows no increase in the general rate. The ORC chairman points out it is a draft budget only, but nevertheless, how refreshing. Why can’t other councils do the same?

Indeed. Most businesses have had to contain costs, as have most households. Even the central Government is doing so. Local Government should follow.

The Dom Post says:

Union of Students Association co-president David Do says student groups are already seeing an increase in exclusions for poor academic performance. He proposes more funding as the solution. It is not. Mr Do says toughening up the admission standards goes against New Zealanders’ sense of fairness and their sentiment that people should be given a “fair go”.

New Zealanders do believe in giving people a “fair go”. They do not not believe in giving them a free ride regardless of performance – especially when taxpayers are paying out nearly $4 billion a year for tertiary education.

Of course NZUSA calls for more funding – just as Labour did. By coincidence Mr Do was the Chairman of the Princes Street Branch of Labour not long ago.

NZUSA often go on about the high level of student debt. Well I’m worried about the high level of taxpayer debt – we are borrowing $240 million every week to fund stuff like universities. To think that taxpayers should borrow even more is naive.

Clint Heine blogs:

WELLINGTON: Slavery should be rebranded as an ‘opt-out labour arrangement’, the New Zealand University Students Association (NZUSA) said today.

“Let’s face it, slavery has a bad name,” a NZUSA representative said. “For thousands of years slavery has been associated with force, compulsion and the negation of civil rights,” he said, “however we think slavery needs a new image”.

After exhaustive research conducted over two and half days NZUSA has suggested that slavery should be thought of as an ‘opt-out labour arrangement’.

“After all, even though slaves were forced into labour against their will, they could always leave—or opt-out—if they wanted to. They could run away or buy their freedom,” NZUSA said. “If slaves were really unhappy about servitude all they needed to do was make a bit of an effort. If they didn’t make the effort we can only assume they were happy.”

“The ability of any slave to opt-out if he or she chooses means that slavery doesn’t breach civil rights,” NZUSA said.

Hilarious. Especially the part about how a slave can opt out of slavery by running away.

NZUSA said their work on slavery was the first in a series. Future reports include: ‘Compulsory military service – opt-out warriors’ and ‘Prisoners – opt-out guests of Her Majesty’.

The reference to compulsory military service is very apt. For proponents argued this was not compulsory due to conscientious objection – the exact same argument used by compulsory student associations.

A snap of Sir Roger with Salient Editor Jackson Wood, showing off one of the badges funded out of compulsory student association fees that say “Leave us alone Roger”.

The irony is that it is fact the compulsory student associations that won’t leave students alone. And that they spend their compulsory funds on stupid badges.

I doubt anyone actually believes the press releases from various student unions, but just in case. First of all OPSA:

ACT’s bill differs from previous attempts at voluntary membership. It will not only force voluntary membership on all campuses irrespective; but it is essentially the same as the “full-blown” type tried in recently in Australia, where institutions are not allowed to charge a compulsory services levy and use this to buy services from students’ associations.

The bill is in fact very much in line with the three previous bills in the 1990s. They all allowed individual students to decide whether or not to join. The current law was a last minute compromise by NZ First.

The issue of service levies has arisen, because it has become de facto compulsory membership in some areas with an institution funding an association through this back door.

Then Te Mana Ākonga:

“The National government have expressed previously that they would like better outcomes for Māori in education. TMA questions how this view is possible if they take the reliable tools we have, this being our voice and the right to express our autonomy” said Poutu

Except Maori students do not have autonomy. They are forced to join the compulsory student associations. Post VSM, Maori student associations could actually compete for members with the main student associations. Students should have a choice as to whether to join any or all of the main campus association, their faculty association, a Maori association if they are Maori.

Then Albany Students Association:

The Albany Students’ Association, a not-for-profit incorporated society that currently serves over 7,000 Massey University Albany campus students, relies heavily on student membership levies and, without them, would be economically crippled. “Contrary to what the ACT Party is suggesting, students are able to opt out of membership if they do not want to be a part of their students’ association, but most of them appreciate and support the fact that we provide student-focused services such as Orientation; student publications, independent advocacy advisors, and welfare services.

They contradict themselves in the same paragraph. They claim with compulsion they would be crippled, yet also claim students can opt out and the fact most don’t is because they do such a good job.

NZUSA do the same:

“Independent representation, advocacy and support, sporting and cultural clubs and social events such as Orientation would all be under threat in the unlikely event that this Bill succeeds, and all in the name of choice – which already exists!” said Blair.  …

New Zealand would do well to heed the lessons from the disaster that recently unfolded in Australia, which saw associations collapse nationwide under a voluntary system, …

I think the SAs must think MPs are morons. They keep claiming there already is choice, yet also claim that voluntary membership will see associations collapse.

What they really mean is that students have choice, in the Cuban sense of choice. A Claytons choice.

NZUSA vows to fight to keep students in the driving seat and interfering politicians out, and to win the battle to protect universal membership and retain quality advocacy and representation for New Zealand students. They deserve nothing less.

Oh really NZUSA should feature in a George Orwell novel. Their fight to stop students being able to decide whether or not to join a student assocaition they label as fighting to keep students in the driving seat.

It sounds like apartheid era South Africa’s defence of the “homelands” on the basis of keeping Black South Africans in the driving seat.

And then they use the Orwellian term universal membership and call it something to be protected. This is like calling armed forces conscription “universal service” and pledging to fight for the right fo young people to be conscripted!

Finally they push the myth they represent New Zealand students. They do not. No one body can represent NZ students. Students have diverse views on issues, and students should be able to decide to fund the views they agree with.

The CTU also joins the fray. Yes the Council of Trade Unions. Their members lost the right to have compulsory membership in the 1980s but they battle for student unions to remain the last hold out

CTU president Helen Kelly said the bill guaranteed the loss of essential student support services.

“Student associations provide critical services such as student loan advice, welfare support, advocacy services, sporting and cultural clubs and facilities that are all essential for student welfare,” she said.

“The loss of these services would be incalculable.”

What a load of nonsense. Student Loan advice?? VUWSA (for example) couldn’t even balance its own budget for most of the decade. Their history of financial mismanagement would make them as suitable to be student loan advisors, as it would be Charlie Sheen to give monogamy advice.

Advocacy services, means advocating for Labour and the Greens – not an essential service. Students should get to choose their advocates.

And is the CTU really claiming that sporting and cultural club are “essential” for student welfare? Oh my God what would we do without the chess club.

Of course that also assumes these clubs would disappear under VSM. They won’t. They just won’t get grants to subsidise (generally) their travel. But the vast majority of clubs will carry on – with students deciding to join and participate in them – as they do now.

I ran into the co-presidents of NZUSA, when down in Dunedin. That reminded me that I had been planning to criticise their response to National’s policy of writing off an additional 10% of any student loan repayments. Note my critical comments are aimed at NZUSA as an institution and not personally directed to the co-presidents.

I would have thought that having hard working taxpayers writing off debt of those with student loans, if they make voluntary repayments, would at least get a small thank you from NZUSA. I mean most sector groups are happy when you give money away for free to their members.

But NZUSA’s response was:

Student leaders are critical of National’s announcement of a new student loan repayment bonus scheme, citing its strict eligibility criteria and lack of vision and scope as its downfalls.

The so called strict eligibility criteria being that they made it easier from their pre-election policy by expanding it to those overseas, and only requiring $500 of repayments over a year – not in a lump sum.

“However most borrowers are already making considerable compulsory loan repayments each week, and can’t afford to make further contributions on top of this. When they are already doing everything they should, why are they now being ignored by the government?”

This is amusing, as compulsory repayments are made through the tax system. Basically those with a student loan effectively pay an extra 10% tax, until they repay their loan. So when NZUSA says people can’t afford to make further contributions, they are in effect calling for lower taxes to list after tax pay. Except they actually attack any reduction in tax rates even though it helps people repay their student debt.

“We question why National has created such a narrow policy that will merely reward the rich and leave everyone else to struggle”

This is the most outraegous part. National is giving away taxpayer money to students and graduates who make voluntary repayments of just $10 a week, and this is called rewarding the rich.

Did NZUSA slam Labour for rewarding the rich when it wrote off interest on student loans? Of course not – even though it massively favoured the well off in society.

Did NZUSA slam Labour for rewarding the rich when it announced that they would no longer restrict student allowances to poorer students, and give them to everyone regardless of wealth? Of course not.

“With such tough economic times, and loan repayment obligations already being met by most loan borrowers, why are the majority being punished and left out of this policy to reduce the debt burden?”

And now NZUSA says this policy of giving away free money to students and graduates who make voluntary repayments, is “punishing the majority”.

I do not, of course, advocate that NZUSA should sycophantically welcome everything National does. But their response to the student loan write-offs was unbalanced to put it mildy – and I daresay totally out of kilter to what would be the reaction from the average student or graduate.

I think National are absolutely nuts to not be introducing voluntary membership of student associations. NZUSA explicitly campiagned against National in the 2008 election. Even though more under 25 voters, supported National than Labour – all those National voting students were forced to fund literature telling them not to vote National.

National could announce a free handout of $20,000 to every student and I suspect NZUSA would condemn them for it, or at the least spend most of their press release complaining it is not $25,000 or it is unfair women students don’t get more than male students or ….

So why is National going to keep forcing hundreds of thousands of students to keep funding student associations who will, beyond any doubt, campaign against National in the next election? It’s almost like National wants to lose the election. I mean could you imagine Labour supporting compulsory membership of (say) Federated Farmers if the Feds spent money telling all farmers to not vote Labour?

Treasury has suggested that the Government should use the tax cuts to increase the minimum repayment rate on student loans, correctly noting that there are little incentives o pay back loans faster at 0% interest.

At present, everyone earning more than $18,000 a year must contribute 10 per cent of their earnings to repaying their loan.

Treasury officials recommend new thresholds be set at 12 per cent for people earning more than $40,000 a year and 15 per cent for those on more than $60,000.

Planned income-tax cuts would offset the effect of the increases, the Treasury said.

Sounds sensible to me. It will lead to less student debt, and faster repayment times – both something student associations have complained about.

It recommends an overhaul of the repayment scheme and measures that “could include requiring students to pass a certain number of their courses or limiting the number of years students can borrow for”.

Also sensible. Good bye to life time students.

New Zealand Union of Students’ Associations co-president Sophia Blair called the Treasury suggestions ” ludicrous”.

“This would take much-needed money directly out of the pockets of struggling families,” she said.

This is ironic. I don’t recall NZUSA campaigning for tax cuts to help struggling families who earn above the average wage.

NZUSA is quoted in The Press:

The rise in compulsory add-on fees at tertiary institutions is under fire from the New Zealand Union of Students’ Associations.

Hmmn, compulsory add-on fees – such as oh all those compulsory student association fees that NZUSA fights so hard to defend.

I’m sure what NZUSA meant is they’re against rises in compulsory add-on fees, except those done by student associations.

Tumeke: “Liz gets fucked by Paul live on breakfast”

When I saw the headline in my RSS feed, my first thought was what about Diane. Then I realised that this was not some new ratings stunt from TVNZ, but a commentary on the performance of NZUSA co President Liz Hawes.

I didn’t see it myself, and no video online yet, so can’t comment on how fair or otherwise Bomber’s commentary is.