Content
Student Amenities Legislation Fails
22 August 2009
It was very disappointing to see that the Federal Government’s ‘Student Amenities’ legislation led to a tied 34-34 vote in the Parliament this week, which means it did not pass.
The opponents of the Bill claimed that students do not need to carry further debt through a compulsory fee, whilst other senators wanted monies exclusively directed to support sport.
As it was framed, the resulting legislation would have allowed students to defer the $250 p.a. fee levy, like HECS, that would be repayable after securing work. It would also have allowed for subsidies being directed toward increasingly important university services, that are currently funded by diverting core operating monies from teaching and research.
Services such as counselling, careers advice, small loans for needy students, support for sporting facilities and subsidies for catering - and the list goes on – are ones which are accessed or needed by many students during their degree programs.
Some students don’t believe there should be compulsion, but like most forms of taxes, this kind of levy is about the greater good. Those students who need such service or support most, will receive the major benefit – just like a Medicare levy in some way. A civilised society is defined by its capacity to think beyond individualism – so in universities.
All of the political dimensions of these monies associated with Guilds and Unions were excluded from this proposed legislation and the funds that USC would have accrued would have all gone to support the student body.
As the university sector expands across the next 10 years to meet the Federal Government’s targets, more first-in-family students will be recruited, as will be the case for low SES students, Indigenous, and disabled.
This changing student population, especially in regional areas like ours where the proportions are greater, are going to require more and more academic and social support structures to ensure they realise their true potential at university.
Not to support such students when they require help would be irresponsible, so we will go on supporting and subsidising student activities despite the meanness of narrow-minded political opponents of the current legislation – but, of course, other areas of the University will pay the price.
Professor Paul Thomas AM is Vice-Chancellor and President at the University of the Sunshine Coast.