Ian Macdonald (Queensland, Liberal Party, Shadow Parliamentary Secretary for Northern and Remote Australia) Share this | Hansard source

I am sorry, Senator Conroy. Perhaps you should go back to whatever party you have been to.

I also want to contribute to this debate. I had not actually listed myself as a speaker, but Senator Bilyk's remarks earlier encouraged me to take part. Senator Bilyk was trying to suggest to the Senate that the coalition was involved in some sort of conspiracy. She suggested that we are opposed to this sort of legislation and student unions because all of the student unions were won by the Left of Australian politics. She was suggesting that that was one of the reasons why the coalition does not support this legislation. I want to start my presentation by paying tribute to the members of the Young Liberal National Party in Queensland who, under the name 'Fresh', their corporate campaigning name at the University of Queensland, won something like—and I do not have these figures before me—59 of the 64 positions on the student union council at the University of Queensland at the last election. And this was the second year in a row in which members of the Fresh group, many of whom are part of the Young Liberal National Party in Queensland, have swept the pool at one of the biggest universities in Australia and certainly one of the sandstone universities. For Senator Bilyk to suggest that we were opposed to this sort of legislation because we did not like the way that student unions were going politically is shown to come out of the completely myopic view that the Labor Party has of the world.

I want to pay credit to those young people in Brisbane who have put the University of Queensland student union in its current form on the straight and narrow, one might to say. For years, politicians from the Left in Queensland, like Anna Bligh and Andrew Fraser, the current Premier and Deputy Premier—and, I suspect, although I cannot say this with any confidence, Wayne Swan and Kevin Rudd were also part of them—have come out of the University of Queensland Labor Left groups that ran the student union for many years. Indeed, the student union at the University of Queensland was shown to be simply a training ground for future Labor politicians. How things have changed. Almost all of the positions on the University of Queensland student union are held by students who have a sensible view on life and who have chosen to join the Young Liberal National Party of Queensland. They have clearly shown that the young people of today understand that the old leftie-socialist regime that used to run student unions in Australian universities is gone.

While I am giving credit to the current group of sensible young people who have taken an active interest in the operation of the services at their university, I also mention with some pride that a few years ago at James Cook University in Townsville, a university of which I am very proud and which is doing great things in many areas but which is particularly recognised for its marine science courses and research, was one of those universities at which the students said, 'We are not going to be part of a left-wing push for students to be forced to pay money so that they can use it to channel into Labor Party propaganda.' Students got involved, got active and had similar sorts of successes to those that the young people at the University of Queensland have achieved in recent times.

These examples put the lie to the Labor argument that these student unions or student groupings have become of no further effect because of the voluntary student union legislation that the Howard government introduced. As previous speakers on our side have said, we believe that it is very important for students to have a choice as to whether they join the union or not. This legislation is the thin end of the wedge in going back to the bad old days of Anna Bligh and Mr Fraser in Queensland and other luminaries when you were forced to join the union. Having been forced to join the union and contribute your money, the union then spent your money on campaigns to support the Australian Labor Party at various elections.

Senator Bilyk said a few things that reminded me of my early days. I am perhaps one of the few in this chamber who has never actually attended a university. I did my university studies many years ago—regrettably, too many years ago—externally while working during the day as an articled clerk. I still remember that in those days I had to pay university fees to get tuition from the University of Queensland. I could not afford to attend the university and was not bright enough to get a scholarship, I have to confess. But it irked me that even back in those days I was forced to join the student union. For the quite considerable amount that I paid—and the amount that I paid for union membership was more than the amount that I used to have to pay for course fees—I used to get two copies of Semper Floreat, the university magazine, every year.

That perhaps has always directed my thinking a little bit on this particular issue of voluntary student unionism. I was not part of the wealthy lot and was not part of the group who are supported by the unions or other scholarships to get to university. But I had to pay this money. The union in those days did absolutely nothing for me except produce a couple of editions of a newspaper every year, which I used to throw away as soon as I received them.

I concur with my colleagues in this debate that this sort of legislation is the thin end of the wedge in bringing back compulsory student union fees. As I understand it, under this bill every one of Australians one million students will be forced to pay $250 per year, regardless of their ability to pay and their ability or willingness to use the services that their fees will be financing. I am very concerned about the effect of enforcement of this legislation. Whilst, as I understand it, the bill prohibits universities or any third parties that may 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 organisations per se, whether students whose money is being spent agree with it or do not. I mentioned the cases of the University of Queensland and James Cook University. Perhaps it would suit my federal political goals if they were able to collect this money and spend it on political campaigns, because perhaps they would spend it on ensuring the return of the next Abbott government. Even in spite of this attraction, I can understand that there would be many students paying those fees who would not support Mr Abbott, me and other politicians from the Liberal and National side of federal politics, and their funds should not be collected by a central group and used in a campaign that is contrary to their wishes. So it does not matter which side of the political fence you come from; it is important that young people are not forced to pay money that is collected and used by a ruling group of people to campaign for someone else.

In the case of the current holders of office at the University of Queensland I am quite sure they would not use the money for political campaigns, were this legislation to be passed. But, regardless of that, history shows over many years that when student unions have been controlled by the Left of politics they have used these compulsory funds to support political organisations that a fair percentage of the union membership did not support.

One of the greatest political issues of the day is the question of trust in government. All of us remember that well before the last election, and indeed just before the last election, our current Prime Minister, Ms Gillard—Prime Minister for a little while anyhow—promised solemnly to every Australian, to every student in every university in Australia, that there would be no carbon tax under a government she led. This was very important to young people, because, as we all know, young people at university do not have a lot of money. They were very concerned that a carbon tax would add to the cost of living—it would add to their rent and to daily living expenses that they could not afford. So, they were quite relaxed before the last election when both Mr Abbott, on behalf of the coalition, and Ms Gillard, on behalf of the Australian Labor Party, solemnly promised every one of those students that there would be no carbon tax under a government she led.

Had this sort of legislation we are debating today been in force, in those universities with student unions controlled by the Left of Australian politics that money may have been used to support various political campaigns. In some universities—not, I am pleased to say, in Queensland—they probably would have used it to support Ms Gillard with her Labor Party campaign. They could have done it on the basis that, even if they did elect Ms Gillard, they knew there would be no carbon tax, so their cost of living would not go up. But, lo and behold, as we all know, because it is now a matter of history, the carbon tax that Ms Gillard promised would not occur—the carbon tax that will increase the living costs of every university student around Australia—is being introduced in the next week of this Senate sitting. The money that students may well have contributed under this particular legislation before us—

Debate interrupted.