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

Generation Y is less committed to the collective and they are less committed to their student union. Students themselves, unlike student politicians, are not interested in student unions or the services student unions provide. In the recent inquiry into this bill Arabella Haddon-Casey put it like this:

The vast majority of students do not have a clue that the government is considering imposing compulsory fees upon them. If it were such a big issue, surely students around the country would be demanding compulsory service fees.

A survey conducted by the Australian Democrats found that 59 per cent of students were against compulsory fees. I am told on average only five per cent of students ever vote in student union elections. The number of individuals who currently opt to join their student union and pay the required fees is similarly small. The only logical conclusion one could possibly deduce from this is that the majority of students simply do not want to pay the relevant fees.

There are many services and activities that are currently provided by the unions that are mostly superfluous. They already exist and are being provided by the universities themselves, by the government or by the non-government voluntary sector. Many of them are free, others are heavily subsidised and all of them are available to university students without any prejudice or discrimination.

When people outside of university need help they go to Centrelink, or legal aid or any number of non-government organisations such as Lifeline. When people outside of university are interested in a pastime, an activity or a sport, they join a club to pursue that pastime, activity or sport together, and they all contribute money to the common pool towards their club or association. Students do not want to be treated differently from everyone else. Outside of the university, they certainly would not expect that everyone in their suburb should be forced to pay a levy or a tax so that they can enjoy beer appreciation or rugby union.

Senator Joyce interjecting—

No, nothing wrong with that, Senator Joyce, but I am sure people do not want to be forced to pay the levy or the tax. In the end, if clubs or services offered on campus are deemed valuable they will earn the patronage of students without any compulsion.

The system remains open to political abuse. Our concern is that it is devoid of effective enforcement mechanisms. We are concerned about the effective enforcement of this legislation. While the bill prohibits universities or other third parties that might receive money from spending it in support of political parties or political candidates, there is nothing to prevent the money being spent on political campaigns, political causes or quasi-political organisation as such, whether students whose money is being spent agree with that or not.

Even with the prohibition on direct support for political parties and candidates, we have to consider how this prohibition can actually be policed. The legislation offers no credible enforcement provisions, and no effective sanction mechanisms are provided for. The bill simply states that it is up to the universities to ensure that the moneys are not spent on political parties and candidates. In the absence of providing universities with any powers to enforce this, it really is a hollow prohibition.

Regrettably, this is compulsory student unionism by stealth. This bill attempts to reimpose a compulsory fee which may in turn fund the activities of student unions. In the past, student unions have proven themselves to be very adept at being creative and using profits from 'allowable' activities to effectively act to cross-subsidise activities where direct funding has been disallowed.

Allow me to deviate to provide an example. In my electorate in the Illawarra I have had occasion to see the University of Wollongong, a very fine establishment, progress to become one of Australia's top universities. Following the passage of the legislation in 2005, the establishment of the Voluntary Student Unionism Transition Fund saw the University of Wollongong receive funds for a multipurpose indoor sports facility of $4.6 million. It also saw a medical services hub for $405,000 and the allocation of funds for a village green oval development project of $2 million.

What has this done? During that time there was a lot of talk about how services on campuses would fold, but this is a very practical example of funds being allocated under the Voluntary Student Unionism Transition Fund to a university to benefit not just the university but also to the community. One only has to attend the University of Wollongong on any day of the week to see how much the multipurpose indoor sports facility, the medical services hub and the village green are being used not just by the university community but also by the wider community in the Illawarra. I was very pleased that the University of Wollongong received such funding following the establishment of the fund. The coalition was very supportive of this university, as indeed we were of other universities. If I am not mistaken, only the University of New England received greater funding.

I will conclude my remarks by saying that the coalition is about freedom of association. We are about allowing people the freedom to not have to join an association. That remains one of the core beliefs of the coalition. Again, this is an act of compulsory student unionism by stealth. I commend those organisations that have fought and fought hard to oppose compulsory student unionism and know that the coalition stands with you on this issue.