Concetta Fierravanti-Wells (NSW, Liberal Party, Shadow Minister for Ageing) Share this | Hansard source

I rise to speak against the proposed Higher Education Legislation Amendment (Student Services and Amenities) Bill 2010. Today we have seen legislation introduced into this place by the Gillard government that will see students taxed an extra $250 a year for services they do not want and cannot afford. Another day, another tax, another attack on the youth of this nation by the Greens-Labor coalition. While the political hacks on the government benches get excited by the return of such draconian laws, students around the nation wonder tonight where they will find the money to front such fees.

It is a great day for all those in the Labor ranks who worked their way up through the radical student wing of the ALP, who spent their youth protesting this or that while others bothered to work hard and attend classes. It is a great day for that bastion of anti-Semitism and bias, the National Union of Students, who know their profligate ways and days of big spending are about to return. Indeed, one Labor staffer was seen crowing today on Facebook that this legislation represented the first step on the march to universal compulsory unionism, and that is what this is all about for the Labor Party—an unbridled commitment to the socialist collective and the destruction of individual choice and freedom.

I find it strange that in the same week that one of the biggest health unions in the country, the HSU, walked away from the ALP, the ALP are trying to force unionism on every single one of the nation's one million university students. I stand opposed to this bill because I believe in the fundamental right of free association. I do not believe, as the Labor and Greens parties do, that students should be forced to pay for services that they neither want nor want to use.

Under this proposed legislation every single one of Australia's one million students will be forced to pay $250 per year to their union. This is regardless of their ability to pay or their desire to use the services they are being forced to fund. This bill represents yet another great big new tax, this time on a demographic that can least afford it. This great big new tax will total $250 million a year—far greater than the $170 million that was compulsorily levied on students in the last year of compulsory student unionism in 2005. This poll tax will be levied on those in our society who can least afford to pay it. This is just another hit to students, who are already struggling in a tough economic climate to make ends meet. This legislation means that they now have to find an extra $250 a year just to stay enrolled in their degree.

For years members of the Howard government toiled to extend the freedom of voluntary student unionism to all Australian tertiary students. We finally achieved this in 2005. The abolition of compulsory student fees has since that time saved students an average of $320 a year. Since the election of the Rudd government in 2007 we have fought hard to prevent this great big new tax. I note that this bill marks the third attempt by this government to impose a compulsory poll tax on students since its election. I also note that, true to form, this represents yet another broken election promise, yet another example of where the Labor government promised not to introduce a tax before the election, only to change its mind once they were elected. This is not good enough.

Those who sit opposite have made all sorts of claims about the desperate state of student unions and university life since the introduction of VSU in 2005. Courtesy of the Australian Liberal Students Federation, I happen to have some facts with me this evening. Can I place on the record my congratulations to the ALSF and also to the Young Liberal Movement for their defence of freedom of association in this country. I would like to address some of the myths that have been promulgated by those opposite.

Myth No. 1: voluntary student unionism has made student organisations lose money. Fact: student organisations that are losing money are those that are typically providing services that are not popular with students. For example, I understand RMIT's student union is just one of those unions that like to cry poor about VSU, but rather than dedicating resources to student advocacy programs they instead have wasted countless dollars on the expensive anticapitalist media program Blazing Textbooks, a radical radio program aired every Saturday morning on 3CR.

Myth No. 2: student services have been decimated since the introduction of voluntary student unionism. Fact: student unions continue to prosper right around the country. Services that are popular with students remain in operation. Rationalisation of services was always to be expected with the introduction of voluntary student unionism, but those services which remain popular with students are still available. If student unions were actually focused on providing services that were relevant to students, membership would undoubtedly be much higher than it is today. Myth No. 3: the government's compulsory amenities fee will make university more equitable for students. Fact: it is my great fear that Labor's $250 amenities fee will in fact increase inequity among university students because it is levied regardless of a student's income. This is a regressive tax and there are no provisions within this legislation to assist low-income students or those from Indigenous or disadvantaged backgrounds. Further still, as my colleague Senator Ryan pointed out earlier this evening, the legislation specifically states that this fee is to be paid regardless of whether the student intends or in fact is able to use the services provided.

Myth No. 4: student life suffers because student unions do not have enough money to fund clubs and societies on campus. Fact: it would seem that whenever student politicians are given the chance to fund either clubs or societies on campus or fund political activities they invariably choose to fund their political activities instead. I highlight the University of Melbourne union that recently reported that it was forced to cut the clubs and societies budget by $18,000 so that it could afford to pay an extra $15,000 to the National Union of Students.

Myth No. 5: this legislation prevents student funds being spent on political activity. Fact: there are insufficient means in this legislation to prevent student organisations wasting money on political campaigns. While sections 19 to 38 set forth guidelines on the appropriate use of funds, there is insufficient scope for the government to enforce such provisions. There are scores of political organisations that are not covered by sections 19 to 38 in this legislation and it is inevitable that student funds will end up in the hands of political activists.

Myth No. 6: VSU has somehow made university more expensive for students. Fact: voluntary student unionism has resulted in huge savings for students who now have the choice to join their union or not. Students who deem their membership of their student union not to be value for money save hundreds of dollars a year. Voluntary student unionism was not about destroying student unions but rather about making them stronger and more affordable. I am told that on average membership of student unions is now $246 cheaper under the current situation than it was in 2005.

Universities have changed significantly over the past few decades. Today, universities are not centres of elitism, but rather mainstream institutions that service a broad cross-section of society. We have seen a demographic shift in the typical university student over time. More mature aged students now attend university and many more students now study part-time, often balancing work and family commitments. Further still, there is much greater flexibility today in learning than ever before with many students choosing to study via distance education, and this legislation makes no provision for that.

This legislation also makes no provision for the 130,000 students studying externally. While these students may never set foot on the campus they are enrolled in, they will still be forced to pay this poll tax. For many students higher education is about just that, education. It is about obtaining a degree—qualifications that will equip them for the real world.