VSU round 2: it’s union vs uni

With future funding now flagged for student services and amenities, an ideological argument over unionism is giving way to jibes over who best runs student services. Youth minister Kate Ellis announced last week that universities would be allowed to set a compulsory student fee, initially capped at $250 and indexed each year, to help rebuild amenities and services decimated by voluntary student unionism (VSU). Ellis said the fee would kick in from 1 July next year, and that a new income-contingent loan – Services and Amenities-HELP – would be available to students who wanted to defer the fee. Her office said SA-HELP would be itemised separately by the tax office but would essentially be added to students’ HECS debts, and that the new loan was the only aspect of the VSU response that would require legislative change. Ellis also announced that from the beginning of 2010, universities would have to meet new national benchmarks on access to student support services, and to fulfil new representation and advocacy protocols. She said compliance with the benchmarks and protocols would be a requirement of Commonwealth Grant Scheme (CGS) funding from 2010. Her office said this would also apply to other future funding arrangements, should the CGS be replaced following the Bradley review. The government will see out the year consulting students and universities over the nature of the benchmarks and protocols. Once they’re in place, the new fee will be spent on services and amenities over and above those required by the benchmarks. This year’s negotiations will also cover how the money can be used in the meantime. Ellis’s spokesperson said the money would go, initially at least, to universities. “Universities will be the first point of call, and also the last point of call in terms of accountability,” he told Campus Review. Unis will be able to pass the funds on to student organisations to run the services, he said, but not in a “holus bolus way”. And clarification is still needed on the types of student organisations eligible to receive the money, and the exact services it will be allowed to fund. University of Adelaide vice-chancellor Professor James McWha welcomed the changes, but warned too much government interference could jeopardise any gains. “The federal government should not dictate what services are to be supplied, or use any threat of financial penalties if these are not adhered to,” he said. “We should heed the lessons of the previous government that unsuccessfully tried to micro-manage the higher education sector.” But National Union of Students president Angus McFarland said the government should force universities to pass the funds to independent student organisations. “I believe there are certain services that are of a higher quality when provided by students,” he told CR. “In practice, it helps to have students overseeing and directing how student fees are spent. Students give more value to services specifically tailored to their wants and needs, and delivered by their peers.” McFarland cited childcare as an example. He said university-run childcare facilities generally involved long day care available year-round. “That reflects the needs of academics. It’s fine for universities to do that – they have a duty of care to their staff. “However, students typically need short day care. They need to be able to have childcare for a few hours, a few days a week, a few weeks of the year. It’s not cost-effective to provide both forms of childcare within the one centre. That’s why lots of universities have childcare centres provided for students by the student union, and centres provided for staff by the university.” The Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations sided with the NUS in calling for fees to be passed to student organisations. “If students are paying, they need to have a direct say in how their money is being spent,” said CAPA president Nigel Palmer. “These measures go some way in recognising that services and representation are an important part of university life, but there is a bigger principle at stake. Since the onset of VSU, we have seen the loss or appropriation of services and infrastructure formerly owned and run by students. The proposals represent the culmination of this, mandating a fee on students that will be controlled and administered by universities. “If a solution to VSU is restoring vibrant student services and representation that are independently funded and run by students, then the measures fail in this. There is nothing to suggest student organisations currently struggling at the margins of sustainability will be able to take any encouragement from this at all.” Universities broadly welcomed Ellis’s announcement, but stressed the need for student representation. Universities Australia (UA) and Innovative Research Universities (IRU) Australia said “an effective student voice” was crucial to good university governance and management. “UA and the NUS have been working, along with the LH Martin Institute, on a skills development package to improve student representation and advocacy,” said UA CEO Dr Glenn Withers. University groups also highlighted the ongoing need for student income support.