CHAPTER 2
Looking at the evidence
2.1 The overwhelming volume of written evidence received by the Committee,
if evidence is measured in quantity alone, indicated opposition to this
legislation. The Committee does not accept that the weight of submissions
opposed to the bill properly reflects the opinion of students. It is the
invariable experience of parliamentary committees that the most vociferous
submissions come from organisations and individuals opposed to change.
Such was the case with the New Tax System inquiry: so it has been for
voluntary student unionism. It follows from this that there has been an
overwhelming presentation of views by those with a vested interest in
the status quo.
2.2 The Committee takes the view that much of the evidence presented
was unduly pessimistic in its forecast of the effects of voluntary student
unionism. It has been the historical experience of legislators arguing
for reform, for as long as parliaments have existed, that upholders of
the status quo will forecast, with statistical verification, the
dire consequences which must inevitably follow change. There is always
a low estimate of the possibility that new arrangements will work because
people will emerge to make them work. The views expressed in most of the
submissions on this bill reveal an underestimate of the capacity, the
resilience and the initiative which student bodies and many individual
student leaders are likely to demonstrate in order to re-establish their
service and representative institutions on a firmer and higher threshold
of popular support.
2.3 The most fundamental challenge to be addressed by student organisations
is that of maintaining broad student support. This will require a very
different approach to student leadership than has usually been exhibited
up till now. Hitherto, the student association structures, underpinned
by assured income to maintain infrastructure and services, have provided
an easy way to the top for a small politically inclined coterie of students.
The new order will require the emergence of leadership skills of a different
kind. These will include entrepreneurial skills and public relations skills.
In some cases we may see the emergence of individuals who would have shown
no interest in student affairs under compulsory unionism. It is more than
likely that a large proportion of currently active students will continue
their involvement in either representative or service providing functions,
and will quickly learn to adjust to these new conditions. The Committee
does not see this legislation as being `anti-student' or even `anti-radical
student'. Voluntary student unionism both maintains and extends the opportunities
and challenges for student self-management.
2.4 Submissions and oral evidence to the Committee made a number of points
about the likely adverse consequences of voluntary student unionism which
need to be addressed. The principal concerns were as follows:
- that the government has taken a completely mistaken view in equating
compulsory membership of student unions and associations with compulsory
membership of trade unions;
- that the legislation attacks the principle of student control of student
affairs, and is unwarranted interference with university affairs;
- that voluntary membership of unions and associations would provide
a `free ride' for those who used services but were not members;
- that the non-academic life of students would suffer because `there
was much more to a university education than lectures, tutorials and
exams';
- that the legislation would have particularly adverse effects on regional
universities and on new campuses with rudimentary or unpaid-for facilities;
- that there would be significant job losses; and
- that because universities would have fewer facilities on offer, foreign
students would find Australian universities less attractive places to
study, thus putting in jeopardy the high return on educational exports.
Student unions and trade unions
2.5 A great number of submissions, including that from the Australian
Vice-Chancellors' Committee, took some pains to explain why student unions
were quite different in kind to industrial trade unions: the inference
being that as this was not the case, the basis of the legislation was
fundamentally flawed. In the Committee's view this claim misses the point.
The argument for legislating for freedom of association does not have
narrow application. It cannot be said to apply only to trade unions. It
may be applied to any association which claims the right to levy a compulsory
fee for providing what is only an adjunct service. The basic right to
employment transcends the obligation to belong to a trade union that might
be associated with that employment. In the same way, the right to an education,
which is self-funded or assisted by government funding (or both), transcends
the obligation to belong to a student association which provides only
adjunct services. This issue does not arise, in practice, where it is
evident to the employee or student that advantage lies in full membership.
2.6 Associated with this argument is the claim that universities are
`communities of scholars', and that they are by virtue of this able to
justify a levy on community activities in the interest of the `common
good'. Analogies have been made with the obligations of rate-payers to
local government authorities. The Committee rejects this argument and
this analogy on grounds that have already been suggested in Para.1.15.
It takes the admittedly unromantic view that the personal identification
of students with their universities as institutions is rather tenuous,
and although some recreational and relaxation activity may be had between
study commitments, the routine of most students is similar to that which
is described in one submission, thus:
…as a person who wouldn't touch the UNY's catering service with
a re-fried chip (although, self-made sandwiches are OK) so saving money
at a `greatly reduced' cost to union members doesn't concern me in the
foggiest. Uni as far as I understand it involves the following –
bus - lectures - bus – home. [1]
2.7 A great many of the submissions received by the Committee reflect
the residual ideal of a liberal education model of a university through
which some sparks of John Henry Newman occasionally flash, but the Committee
rejects the view that this ideal of a scholastic community will suffer
as a result of this legislation. It is more likely to revitalise university
social and community life.
2.8 On the issue of trade union activity, it needs to be stressed that
political representation is just one form of 'service' that students unions
can provide if the controlling body of that union agrees that this is
in the best interest of students. In this respect, certain activities
of student unions are very much like trade unions, although this is much
denied by the student unions themselves. For instance, NUS state that:
NUS believes that the Government has conflated student organisations
with trade unions in its determination to legislate for voluntary membership
and contribution payments for students... [2]
2.9 This statement is contradicted quite strongly by NUS itself. For
example, in evidence presented at the public hearing, on page one of the
National Union of Students audited report for the year 1997, signed off
by the President and General Secretary of NUS on 22 October 1998, it was
stated that:
The principal activity of the Association was the provision of trade
union services to its members at all levels within Australia. [3]
2.10 Although the political aspect of student unions is not the focus
of the Government, there were a number of submissions to this Committee
which did express concern about the political nature of student unions
and, more importantly, the fact that some students are being forced to
fund political or moral causes that they were utterly opposed to. Examples
of these included submissions by Mr Dan Schiewe who stated that:
Considerable sums of student union money are spent on providing travel,
accommodation, and other benefits to student union "officials"
for whom many students did not vote and with whom they have no philosophical
common ground. [4]
2.11 This theme is further developed in the section below which deals
with the bias that compulsory fees have against politically weak groups
at university.
Compulsory unionism is biased against the politically weak
2.12 Many of the submissions proclaimed the idea that the allocation
of student resources is best achieved through the democratic processes
of the student unions. However, this very mechanism itself is insufficient
for some, especially the politically weak, as was stated clearly in a
submission by Right to Life Australia. Their submission states that:
Right to Life Australia supports the present government move, in the
form of legislation, to cease compulsory payment of union fees by tertiary
students.
The reason for our support for the plan is quite simple. A considerable
amount of the money collected compulsorily, from unsuspecting students,
is used to run campaigns of a political nature to promote abortion…
[5]
The submission goes on to note that:
The National Union of Students women's section, spent a lot of money
in Victoria, to print posters and leaflets calling for students to rally
to "smash the Right to Life" prior to our annual Life Walk,
a peaceful fund raising and consciousness raising event. Violent protests
took place on at least three occasions at our Life Walk, with Victorian
police hard put to control the students.
I do not believe that student union fees should be able to be used
to promote any particular idealogy. [6]
2.13 The Government does not wish to endorse or reject the opinions or
policies of Right to Life Australia. This is not the issue. However, the
predicament of Right to Life Australia illustrates exactly why the Government's
model of voluntary student unionism is important. The issue is not whether
or not student unions should have a particular policy on abortion or family
issues, or about the treatment by student unions of those students or
groups who disagree with the policy of the relevant student organisation.
The issue is that under the current compulsory scheme there will always
be students or groups who are funding activities that they are morally
opposed to.
2.14 Only the Government's model of Voluntary Student Unionism can
absolutely guarantee that no student will be forced to fund an activity
that they are deeply opposed to.
Student control of student affairs
2.15 The Committee has heard argument that voluntary student unionism
would have more justification if it were promoted and acted upon by students
themselves. The Committee does not dispute this argument. It also recognises,
however, that in circumstances where entrenched vested interests hold
sway, governments have a responsibility to consider the wider public interest.
Universities are not privileged enclaves which can be allowed to operate
in ways which are out of step with processes accepted by the community
at large. Students are citizens who have the same expectations of their
governments as other citizens: that governments will legislate in their
broader interests, in particular to protect their rights of association
or non-association, and to safeguard expectations of value-for-money in
their purchase of an education.
2.16 A principal outcome of the bill will be a strengthening of student
association accountability for its expenditure. The Committee notes that
a number of submissions describe in detail the legal accounting procedures
which exist for the auditing of union accounts. These do not, however,
take account of the nature or purpose of expenditure. They only record
the `money trail' and are an anti-fraud insurance measure. This has little
to do with ensuring accountability where it is a real issue: looking at
why expenditure is authorised for particular purposes. The Committee has
heard allegations of fraud in the conduct of student union affairs, and
is satisfied that strict audit procedures are a deterent to this activity.
More problematic has been the improper – though not unlawful - expenditure
of student funds on particular causes, as in the case of large donations
to political parties at election time. A characteristic problem of university
unions in ensuring proper accountability is described in one submission
from a Victorian university:
Under compulsory GSF there is very little accountability. The nature
of student politics at La Trobe University is that such elected representatives,
who are responsible for spending in excess of 70 percent (approximately
$3 million) of the GSF, are by reason of their short stay at university
limited to one term of office. In other words, student representatives
do not expect to put themselves up for re-election. The outcome is that
student politicians remain immune to student opinion and pressure as
they know they will not be called to account for a previous term of
office. [7]
2.17 Compulsory student unionism encourages this kind of irresponsibility.
The Committee refutes the argument that the proposed legislation is aimed
at `eliminating' a cadre of `professional' student politicians. It is
aimed more especially at injecting into student affairs a greater imperative
to perform professionally. This was a point emphasised at the public hearing
by a former president of the Australian National University Students'
Association:
…organisations which depend on the funds of people who are there,
by virtue of compulsion, tend to become lethargic…A lot of organisations
lose touch with what they are supposed to be doing. It is almost invariably
tied up with security in the source of funding – the knowledge
that, no matter how badly they do, there will still be a pay cheque
there for people who run the organisation; who get benefit from this
particular operation. I do not think any organisation should be in that
position if it can be avoided. There should be a sense of having to
account to people regularly…I saw in my own time at university,
how little accountability there was by those student organisations to
the people that they served. [8]
2.18 Finally, on this point, the promotion of voluntary student unionism
has been frustrated by anti-democratic tendencies in some universities
where freedom of expression has had a suprisingly narrow interpretation.
The Committee heard evidence of the suppression of materials promoting
voluntary student unionism during orientation week at the University of
Adelaide in February this year. The Adelaide University Liberal Club was
advised of this resolution of the Adelaide University Union:
That distribution of pro VSU material will not be permitted within
or around the Union premises or at Union or affiliate sponsored events.
We come to this view as Administrators of an organisation with an obligation
to protect that organisation. [9]
2.19 The Committee does not believe this blunt application of the power
of vested interests in universities to be an isolated example. It goes
some way to explain why students opposed to compulsory unionism have been
forced to take their concerns beyond the campus and to find support in
a broader polity. Student control of student affairs will be an ideal
taken more seriously only when genuinely free discourse results in the
election of responsive and responsible student government.
Dealing with `free-loaders' under VSU
2.20 The evidence from Western Australia suggests that universities will
need to come to grips with this issue, which each university will need
to deal with in its own way. The use of some services by non-members –
especially food and beverages – should present few problems as it
is in the interest of unions to maximise business. Access to other services
can be regulated by the issue of photographic cards to members, which
will also allow members' discounts on commonly available services. These
are routine procedures which operate outside universities and their adoption
by university unions will, in time, be readily accepted. The Committee
believes that it would be quite appropriate for unions to regard these
processes as a way of promoting union membership, apart from other inducements.
Alleged detriment to non-academic life of students
2.21 A large number of submissions dealt with this issue. The Committee
is strongly in agreement that university life consists of more than lectures,
tutorials and exams, although it makes the point, on behalf of a very
significant proportion of students, that traditional undergraduate pastimes
maybe less in demand in these days of a changing student profile and changes
in employment patterns. This point has already been covered in paras.
1.15, 1.16 and 2.5.
2.22 In the Committee's view the extra curricula activities of students
would only be marginally affected by the introduction of voluntary student
unionism. A great many recreational services now offered to students are
already provided on condition of payment. At its hearing the Committee
explored with representatives of Australian University Sport the developments
in sport in universities in Western Australia since the introduction of
voluntary student unionism in that state. A picture emerged of a continuing
and dynamic sports culture, attracting increased support from the corporate
sector. [10] This was referred to by the Minister
during the consideration in detail of the bill in the House of Representatives:
The very great hole in the Labor Party's case on this is that we already
have voluntary student unionism in one state in exactly the sense that
the Commonwealth is seeking to legislate for, and in that state we have
a very vibrant student life. All this scare talk about the termination
of student services around Australia is shown to be totally fallacious
by the experience in Western Australia. Indeed I recently had the opportunity
to see a presentation by a sports union at the University of Western
Australia which made the point that they now had more income than they
had in the days of compulsory student unionism. That presentation was
making an argument to the sports associations at all other universities
that, with well-managed sports unions under voluntary student unionism,
it is quite possible to attract the members and the funding that will
provide a vital sports life on campus. [11]
2.23 Basic to this legislation , however, is the assumption that if students
believe that a rich extra-curricula life is important at university then
they will pay for it. They will support student organisations because
they are worth supporting. For instance, the Committee received a submission
from the Sydney University Ski Club which cast doubt upon the financial
ability of many students to continue skiing if sports union funds were
lost to the club. [12] While the Committee
does not reject this assertion out of hand, it points out that keen participants
in sports which attract such enthusiasts have a capacity to find money
when needed. In this case it could well come from savings made from the
voluntary union fee. Thus SUBSKI may find itself in more comfortable circumstances
than it may have imagined if the majority of its members are able to afford
higher joining fees.
Effect on regional universities
2.24 The Committee received submissions from all regional universities,
and noted both the claim to regional disadvantage, and the lack of any
substantiation of these claims. The Committee sees no particular disadvantage
to regional and rural universities flowing from this legislation. It did
note that some universities claim a very high degree of involvement with
community groups whom they claim to be dependent to some extent on the
local university. Thus, the Bathurst campus of Charles Sturt University
cited its gymnastics program as pivotal to the teaching of gymnastics
in the city. [13] The University of New England
Union described its considerable and successful entrepreneurial endeavours
in staking out its financial commitment to the City of Armidale, including
ownership of a hotel and a cinema. [14] In
the Committee's view the UNE union initiatives should serve as a model
of how unions will need to operate in future. Many other examples were
given in submissions to the Committee.
2.25 It is difficult for the Committee to accept that services of this
kind will terminate simply because of this legislation. User-pay principles
will ensure the continued viability of services whether they are sold
to students or to members of the local community. Furthermore, it is unlikely
that regional universities will face the same level of competition as
metropolitan university unions will face if union catering services are
contracted out under new arrangements. The Committee has also heard evidence
of the closer and more cohesive relation between students and their union
which prevails in regional universities. [15]
This appears to be confirmed by impressions the Committee has gained from
reading submissions from regional universities.
Job losses
2.26 In the same vein, the Committee heard evidence and read submissions
about projected job losses in union service facilities. The most detailed
claims came from the Australasian Campus Union Managers' Association,
whose survey claims an estimated job loss of over 3,000 permanent and
part-time jobs, not including indirect job losses. [16]
The Committee views this survey with scepticism. It takes no account of
the redistribution of spending and of employment. Claims of this nature
are very difficult to substantiate or assess. The Committee acknowledges
that there is likely to be structural change resulting from a re-orientation
of services entailing some contractions and some expansions.
2.27 It should be understood that universities and university unions
are not primarily organisations established for the purposes of employing
people. Like any other organisation they employ according to requirement.
A reduced requirement for labour may be a consequence of a choice made
by students for a reduced range of services, but this is unlikely to have
a significant impact on non-discretionary services like food and beverage
services, where relative stability in employment may be expected. While
it is likely that students may have a modest increase in disposable income
as a result of voluntary student unionism, it is impossible to anticipate
where this would be spent.
Impact on international student enrolments
2.28 The Committee heard evidence from the Convenor of the National Liaison
Committee for International Students in Australia on the important work
of that organisation in maintaining a continuing link with the Australian
university alumni in south-east Asia. It was not made entirely clear to
the Committee, however, how adversely that organisation would be affected
by the legislation. It appeared to the Committee that much of the work
of the National Liaison Committee, particularly its orientation and `meet
and greet' activities could continue as before. The Committee was, however,
concerned about the uncertainty existing in the minds of organisation
members about the application of this legislation to foreign students,
given that the fee structure and enrolment processes for international
students is different from that applying to local students. The Committee
recommends that this matter be clarified between the National Liaison
Committee and DETYA.
2.29 The Committee sees no cause for alarm at gloomy prognostications
about the adverse effects of voluntary student unionism on the enrolment
of international students. While it is probably too early to make any
firm assumptions based on data available from DETYA about enrolments in
Western Australian universities, the first indications offer no comfort
for opponents of the legislation. In 1994, before the introduction of
voluntary student unionism, Western Australian universities enrolled 6,242
international students. The 1998 figure was 9,764 student enrolments,
representing an increase of 56 per cent. This exceeds the increase for
universities in New South Wales over the same period. In the Committee's
view this comparison probably reflects the closer proximity of Perth to
south-east Asia, and the lower costs overall. To the extent that voluntary
unionism is an issue, it probably contributes to lower costs.
Footnotes
[1] Submission No.404, Mr Blake Scriven
[2] Submission No. 219, National Union of Students,
p. 8
[3] Tabled evidence, National Union of Students
incorporated, Financial Statements for the year ended 1997. Lockwood White
Services (Chartered Accountants) and the National Union of Students Inc.
[4] Submission No. 3, Mr Dan Scheiwe.
[5] Submission No. 160, Mrs Margaret Tighe,
Right to Life Australia
[6] ibid, pp.1-2
[7] Submission No. 98, La Trobe University Liberal
Club, p.1
[8] Hansard, Canberra, 7 May 1999, p.22
[9] Hansard, Canberra, 7 May 1999, p.26
[10] Hansard, Canberra, 7 May 1999,
pp.62-64
[11] Hansard (Representatives), 12 May
1999, p.4245
[12] Submission No. 14, Sydney University Ski
Club, p.2
[13] Submission No.51, Mitchell Association
of Student Councils - Charles Sturt University, p.1
[14] Submission No.22, University of New England
Union, p.2
[15] Hansard, Canberra, 7 May 1999,
p.82
[16] Submission No. 159, Australasian Campus
Union Managers Association, p.7