The proposed "voluntary student unionism" (VSU) legislation has provoked a major uproar. Screaming headlines, such as "Student union plan disaster", "Why voluntary unionism won't work" and "Voluntary union fees split Liberals", have appeared in many newspapers. Conservative forces such as the Australian Vice-Chancellor's Committee (AVCC) and even the NSW Young Liberals have come out against the proposed form of VSU. BRONWEN JENNINGS and WENDY ROBERTSON look at this opposition and what it means for the campaign against VSU.
The AVCC's opposition stems from the proposal to ban the collection of the general services fee (GSF), charged by universities on enrollment. The fee subsidises cafeterias, child-care services, student housing, and sports and entertainment facilities on campus.
Some of these would not be able to be run at a profit, leaving the VCs with two choices: let the "market" take its course (services sacrificed or made more expensive), or subsidise services with money from government operating grants (leaving less money for the university). The AVCC recognises that GSF-supported services and "student representation" add to campus culture and make universities more marketable to potential students.
Liberal Party backbenchers, such as Queensland Liberal Bob Katter, have also questioned the banning of the GSF. This reflects pressure from rural constituencies. Student unions provide a substantial number of jobs and essential services in rural areas, which will be jeopardised under VSU.
Figures released by the Australian Campus Union Managers' Association show that 82% of regional student organisations provide facilities that are used by the wider community. Rural government politicians fear a potential backlash from voters, many of whom are already angry about government cuts to regional services.
These conservatives do not oppose the entire VSU legislation and few voices have been raised against the central political purpose of VSU legislation — the crushing of student political organisation.
The Sydney Morning Herald editorial on March 11 argued that the compulsory student services fee should be quarantined from political uses: "Such an arrangement would preserve the best part of the student union tradition — and leave the rest [the political aspects of student unions] to fend for itself."
Conservatives claim that services provided by student organisations are in the interest of the student population but the political organisations are "high jinks that have nothing to do with the general interests of the students they are supposed to represent" (SMH, March 11).
The political side of student unions, we are told, provides a breeding ground for future politicians. "Why, if it weren't for student politics, we might not have Peter Costello with us today", explained the SMH on March 13. If that were the case, many students would probably support VSU!
The Coalition government is attempting to remove the GSF because that is the most effective way of paralysing student unions. The current form of the legislation is the harshest possible version of VSU. It is based on removing the entire funding base for the student organisation.
The Victorian campaign against state-based VSU in 1995 mobilised many people on the grounds that VSU would mean the loss of services. When the government backed down and allowed some services like food, debating societies and some welfare services, while still disallowing funding for unions' political campaigns, newspapers and affiliation to the National Union of Students, students were not convinced of the need continue to fight and VSU was passed.
The student movement must refuse to narrow its focus to that of the services-based opposition promoted by the AVCC. This does not mean ignoring the question of services. We should be drawing all those affected by the legislation into the campaign against it, but we need to convince everyone involved of the undemocratic nature of the attack.
While the AVCC opposes the current form of the legislation, the student movement needs to understand that the VCs' opposition is limited and likely to evaporate if a compromise which protects services is made.
The student movement must ensure that the voice of student opposition is not drowned out by the louder voice of the AVCC. The only way we can ensure this is if students organise a mass campaign that seeks to defend both the right to retain control student services and the right to politically organise through student unions.
Sydney University Student Representative Council education officer Aaron Benedek explained: "Students need to learn the lessons of the Victorian campaign against VSU. We have to convince students, from the beginning of the campaign, that VSU will hurt both services and representation.
"In defending the political nature of student unions we are defending the ability of students to fight education cuts and attacks on student income support, and to participate in broader social struggles. Winning students to this perspective will enable us to stop VSU."