National should kill 'destructive' ACT bill - NZUSA

Print

Tue, 19 Jul 2011 11:10a.m.

Logan Edgar is spending two nights in a cage in protest against the bill

Logan Edgar is spending two nights in a cage in protest against the bill

By Ally Mullord

Otago University Students Association president Logan Edgar is spending two nights in a cage in protest against ACT’s Education Amendment Bill, which would end compulsory membership of student associations.

New Zealand Union of Students' Associations co-president David Do says the bill is “destructive and unnecessary”, and the National Party should remove its support.

Mr Do told Firstline this morning that if the bill passes, students will lose access to important services, compromising student welfare and education.

“The prison that [Mr Edwards] is in symbolises what students will be under if this bill is passed,” he says.

“Students will be locked out of the student services, representation, sports clubs - all the new experiences that they can get through their association.”

Student associations are an important part of the community, Mr Do says – similar to a local council where “everyone pays rates… so the council can provide things that benefit everyone”.

He says ACT’s bill is “a bit like saying ‘I don’t want to pay rates because I haven’t been to the library or the park recently’”, and the party is ignoring students’ opinions.

 Mr Do says that over 5000 submissions were made on the bill last year, and 98 percent of those opposed it.

“Students do not want this bill, it’s a destructive and unnecessary bill, and actually their parents, universities, polytechnics, the community, Maori… the list goes on in terms of who opposes this bill.”

If the bill is passed, Mr Do says student associations will lose membership and no longer be able to provide services and representation.

The predicted loss in membership if the bill passes is “not a comment on the value of services and representation that we provide,” he says, but the inevitable product of cash-strapped tertiary students.

“Students are quite financially hard up at the start of the year, and… expecting students to sign up at the start of their studies, when they’re quite short on cash and they don’t necessarily know everything that is on offer, means that it will be very hard to find members.”

Mr Edgar’s protest is “highlighting… that National needs to listen to students, it needs to see sense, drop its support for the bill and stop rewarding ACT for its bad behaviour”, he says.

“We would urge National to drop its support for this bill, kill the bill before the election.”

Watch the video for the full interview

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

20 Aug 2011 12:27p.m.

Anna wrote:

I am a student and almost all the students I know utilise the students association, through reduced bus fares, gym passes, doctors fees, chaf, to having representation. It would take the student voice away, as many of our debates are held through services such as chaf (student news paper). I feel my money is well spent and this act just removes my oportunity to use loan to pay for these services. I will otherwise not be able to afford membership. Through reading letters sent into chaff many other students appear to feel the same way.

30 Jul 2011 05:17p.m.

Student 3 wrote:

As a student who does utilize these services I find the bill frustrating, not because I like others to subsidize me, but, because as I understand it I will not be able to use my student loan to pay for it. I would have no objection to changing the opt out clause that is already present so that you did not have to pay any fees. However to remove the ability to fund it using student loan effectively places the service outside of my ability to afford.

24 Jul 2011 01:49p.m.

jabba wrote:

I heard somewhere that a vast majority want forced membership compulsory. If that is true, then what’s the problem?

20 Jul 2011 06:10p.m.

Alex wrote:

Good on you Logan, anything to destroy ACT's (or even possibly National's) vision of a user-pays society. Students don't have a lot of money and it will have a serious detriment to the education of those who aren't from privileged families.

19 Jul 2011 11:07p.m.

Chris wrote:

Re. Jimmy's comment: The "free-rider" problem is relatively easy to solve, just print a little icon or something on the student ID of those who pay the union fees, those with the icon on their card can use services (discount rates for medical center for example) those without pay full price. Any complaints, well they should have paid the union fees :)

19 Jul 2011 02:40p.m.

Craig wrote:

His greatest fear is that he will be out of a job along with all his mates. These professional "students" live off the apathy of their fellow students who are only there long enough to finish their degrees. If they where given a choice to pay these peoples wages and for services they don't use, they won't. Ask any Otago student if they where happy paying the $400 hundred dollar building levy when they could barely pay rent on their own flat.

19 Jul 2011 01:48p.m.

Goldstein Enemy of the State wrote:

education will be replaced with slave training

19 Jul 2011 01:13p.m.

Alien wrote:

rubbish student, it is an example of a nasty student union taking away people's right to decide if they belong or not.

19 Jul 2011 01:11p.m.

Wolfman wrote:

And to think this idiot is looking to be a future leader of this country, maybe Labour should sign him up now, he fits in well with their beliefs. This is all about dollars and nothing else. Why should this body have compulsory Unionism when it is not compulsory anywhere else in this country.

19 Jul 2011 01:11p.m.

Chris wrote:

I used next to no student services when I was at university yet I had to pay for it. Forcing everyone to pay so that some (who need them) can use the services isn't particularly fair. Some people are being forced to subsidize others. Membership will go down, yes, and those that remain members would have to pay more to receive the same services. I wouldn't think that the membership would go down as much as to seriously threaten the ability to continue providing services. The submissions don't really mean much, as only staunch opposers of the bill would have made one.