Nash Stuart: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Nash Stuart: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17601] 
STUART NASH (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to speak in the Committee stage of the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill and specifically to clause 6. I do so for a number of reasons. First and foremost is the fact that I have worked at a university and I know what a university student union does and I have come to value it greatly. 
The second reason I want to speak on this bill is that I went to the Eastern Institute of Technology which is the Hawke’s Bay polytech and spoke to the students about this issue. I spoke to the students about new section 229A inserted by clause 6 which states: “No student or prospective student at an institution is required to be a member of a students association.” Do members know what those students said to me? They said that their student union would cease to exist if this bill goes through. The level of pastoral care that the student union provides is immense. 
To me it is like an insurance policy. Canterbury aside I do not know anyone whose house has been burnt down but every person I know who owns a house has insurance. That is what a student union is. The vast majority of students do not use the student union and do not require the pastoral care but others do. Making membership voluntary will destroy the lives of students. 
We have to remember that a lot of students are leaving home for the first time. They are facing a whole lot of pressures that they would not normally face and have not faced before. They will face those pressures and now that those members are taking away that safety net and that pastoral care these students will fail. The Government measures institutions on how many students pass. This change will ruin those statistics. 
The other thing I would like to talk about is new section 229C which deals with complaints. Section 229C(1) states: “A student or prospective student who on reasonable grounds considers that any person has exerted undue influence … may lodge a complaint with the council of the institution.” Section 229C talks about that whole process and about the university council. Anyone who knows about a university council or a polytech council will know the amount of work those people have to go through. It is an immense amount of work. It is like being a member of a board. These are highly skilled people who are time-constrained. They are sitting on a university or polytech council basically out of the goodness of their hearts but also because they believe in the value of the institution. You tie up a university council with numerous complaints of this nature and I will tell you what: institutions will lose— 
Jo Goodhew 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. I was wondering when your being brought into the debate by the new member might be recognised. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: The member is quite right. 
Hon Member 
: He’s not a junior member any more. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Rick Barker) 
: I am on my feet. The member will be silent. The point of order is quite correct. The member should not bring the Chair into the debate. 
STUART NASH 
: Institutions will lose council members. The council members who sit on the boards of polytechs and universities will say they cannot be bothered with it. They came to help with the governance of that university or polytech yet they are spending 50 percent of their time—this is what the bill says—dealing with complaints from students. That is not what a university or a polytech council is for. Yet a huge chunk of this bill section 229C “Complaints” relates to how councils will have to hear complaints from students who believe on reasonable grounds that a person has exerted undue influence. That is a waste of time. 
This bill takes away any level of pastoral care that students provide to their peers and it also takes away I believe the ability of very good people to sit on university and polytech councils. This complaints process is quite onerous. I think this complaints process under section 229C will dissuade students from complaining. In fact this bill will become a bit of a nothing. Have members read what students have to go through? They have to lodge a written complaint on reasonable grounds. It has to go to a university board which sits about once a month. There will be a whole stack of maybe 10 12 or 20 complaints. Then the board has to make a decision. Every student who lodges a complaint has the ability to be represented.