because I said so

telling it like I think it is: sunili’s blog

student services: who pays wins?

with 4 comments

Oh bless. Not many things get the Aussie partisans as worked up as what gets done uni students’ time and money.

In the Red corner: those latte-drinking pinko student unionists, who (allegedly) skip class to sit around in the Guild offices finger-painting painting giant calico banners for the next protest march — forests? Gay marriage? Nuclear energy? Whatever the lame cause, those lefties scumbags will use student funds to politicise it. Oh the horror.

In the Blue corner: those latte-drinking ponyclub Student Liberals, who (allegedly) skip class to work in blue-ribbon electorate offices and assault constituents, or scheme to dupe innocent electors with illegal fake how-to-vote material [See: Pandagate. Oh kids. Those were the days!!] and would rather die than have daddy’s $250 used to pay for a studying mother’s childcare subsidy. I mean. Jeez. Don’t they get Centrelink for that?

Now, having been at a tertiary institution in which the embryo of student activism was well and truly aborted long before that baby could start kicking and screaming (you guys! I am hil-EFFING-larious!!), I never got to witness or be involved in the fun first hand. But I have a little bit of experience when it comes to some of the ideas being tossed around in the current proposal on the student-services-funding merry-go-round:

From July next year, universities will be able to charge students a compulsory $250 fee to run student services like health, childcare and sports clubs.

…”This is a contribution which goes to universities, not to any individual student union, and it is entirely at the discretion of universities,” Mr Rudd said. [ABC News]

UWA’s Guild Prez Nick Barron “says he hopes some of the money will go to the unions”:

“There isn’t really any guarantee in the information that’s been released so far that this money will necessarily reach student organisations which is something we would have liked to have seen,” he said.

“But we’d hope that individual universities would acknowledge that the best service providers are student organisations run by students who are on the ground and have the best contact with the people who these services will ultimately be provided to.” [ABC News]

He better be hoping and praying really hard, though. I heard young Nick being interviewed on jjj’s Hack this afternoon, and when presenter Kate O’Toole asked him what would happen if the university itself had control over student services like student papers, I wanted to pick up the phone and tell them all about dear, darling Quasi. RIP, little guy.

Barron made some great points about how it should be the student organisation that deal with the cash, but I just felt he didn’t have the fear in him. Probably because their student paper has never been told that funding will be withdrawn if they try to publish any sort of criticism of university policy or any sort or anything students might actually give a shit about (that’s a small category; students are generally apathetic buggers, aren’t they?)

From my humble experience, when you take the money to the administration side of the equation, you get the same power structure that might’ve been seen between the Deputy Principal and high school prefects. Fun times.

No hat, no play, children. And don’t forget your permission slips.

Advertisements

Written by Sunili

3 November 2008 at 8:21 pm

4 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. I really have to disagree here. The uni admin does things like admin much better than the guild. Childcare, counselling etc, the guild are useless at. While the paid full time staff are usually excellent, the elected guys are always wankers, and all their time is taken up with being wankers and knifing other wankers. Unfortunately the wankers are the one who decide what to spend money on. I would say it would be more efficient to flush the money down the toilet in canberra and cut out the handling costs than give it to guilds.

    The Worst of Perth

    4 November 2008 at 7:23 am

  2. Some interesting comments about VSU from Stephen Smith, formerly Shadow Education Minister, before the election last year:

    “No, well, firstly I am not considering a HECS style arrangement, I’m not considering a compulsory HECS style arrangement and the whole basis of the approach is one of a voluntary approach. So I am not contemplating a compulsory amenities fee.”

    (Doorstop, Stephen Smith, Shadow Minister for Education & Training – 22/5/2007)

    “I certainly do not have on my list an extension of HECS, either voluntary or compulsory, to fund these services. So I absolutely rule that out.”

    (Doorstop, Stephen Smith, Shadow Minister for Education & Training – 22/5/2007)

    The Rudd government are clearly going back on their promise to maintain voluntary fees, and not to extend the HECS system to include either voluntary or compulsory amenities fee. According to Kate Ellis’ announcement last night, the ALP will be trying to do exactly what they promised they would not do before the election.

    AB

    4 November 2008 at 10:01 am

  3. […] PS: I EFFING TOLD YOU SO. Possibly related posts: (automatically generated)The War on Quasiwriting to fight, better yet, […]

  4. […] » Just sent off a letter to The Hon Kate Ellis MP, Minister for Youth, about whether the proposed student services fee will have a mechanism to prevent the administration from muffling students’ voices by […]


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: