Shearer David: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Shearer David: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21098] 
DAVID SHEARER (Labour—Mt Albert) 
: 
 I also support the amendment put forward by Grant Robertson for similar reasons to those that Chris Hipkins was just talking about. I think we need to look at two things here. First of all the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill is a contentious one. Over the last decade and a half we have swung backwards and forwards between voluntary and compulsory membership. A review of that a review of the way that the bill is progressing and the way that the students associations are actually faring under this new regime would be a good thing to institutionalise within the context of the bill with the addition of new clause 10. Of course if and when we have the next Labour Government we will probably bring forward the review much sooner than 5 years. We will probably look at putting in place robust and enduring legislation that would perhaps depoliticise this particular issue and enable the students associations to carry on and do what they are supposed to do which is to continue to provide the services and advocacy they have been providing up to today. 
But if we were to have a review and if it were to happen every 5 years we would want that review to look at a number of different aspects. First of all what services were being provided at that time versus the services that were being provided 5 years before? If we look at the experience of both the Australian situation and what has happened at universities in New Zealand we sort of know what will happen. We will see a degradation of services we will see services taken over by the universities and we will see the universities charging students for the continuation of those services. We will see the universities not only charging students but then contracting back many of those services to the students associations which have been running those services for many many years and we will see students paying a levy but not having the opportunity to have representation in relation to what money is going to them and how that levy is being set. That is one aspect of a review of this area that I would certainly welcome. 
We could also look at some of the services that the students associations are taking an active role in right now. We as New Zealanders have an active interest in making sure those services continue. One for example is Student Job Search and the job search and careers advice that is being provided to ensure that our students go on to be productive members of and enormous contributors to the workforce of New Zealand. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
DAVID SHEARER 
: Before we broke for dinner I was looking at the amendment that Grant Robertson has put to the Committee to insert a new clause 10 into the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill. His thinking around this as he explained it was that after a period of 5 years—and I think the period is arguable but anyway that is what it says—we would look to review sections 229A to 229CA. That would mean that we go back to the whole concept of whether to have a voluntary students association or to make it compulsory. Actually I do not like the word “compulsory” because it is compulsory to join up but if students want to opt out there is the option to opt out as many other speakers have talked about before. But this review would look at the applicability of the bill we are looking at tonight 5 years down the track. My personal preference would have been a series of options—rather than 5 years perhaps 1 year 2 years 3 years. I think 5 years is a long time and in the course of that time an extraordinary amount of damage could be done to students associations. 
The important thing here is what exactly the review would cover. If we look at the legislation 5 years down the track we will probably want to compare the services available from the university that students accept and enjoy right now with the services being provided in 5 years’ time; to look at the advocacy that happens now versus what is happening in 5 years’ time. I guess the question in terms of services is whether the services are being provided by the students associations or actually by the universities. What has happened in pretty much every case where a bill of this nature has been brought in—in Australia in particular—is that the students associations effectively have collapsed and the actual universities themselves have picked up the costs of some of the services but not necessarily the complete menu of services that were being provided beforehand. So the universities in effect were having to charge levies were having to charge students for those costs. In my mind that would be the No. 1 issue if we were to review this legislation. I think it is a good thing to do; all legislation should be reviewed. Perhaps putting in a clause with a compulsory review in 5 years’ time is quite a good idea. 
The second part is looking at the students associations and seeing what services they provide to the students; not those services that are found around the outside of the universities—the counselling health and various other cultural and sporting services all those sorts of services which I think will end up suffering under this bill—but the type of thing students associations are doing to improve teaching and improve the various aspects of university life within the classroom. I know after going to Unitec the polytech in my electorate and talking to the students association that it has an extraordinarily good programme that actually rates the quality of the teaching. That is not terribly comfortable for a lot of the lecturers and teachers I have to say. It is not a terribly popular thing. But the chief executive officer of Unitec agreed that it go ahead and pretty much everybody accepts that it has lifted the quality of the teaching and lifted the quality of the tuition within Unitec’s various lecture theatres classrooms labs and other places. So students associations are not there to offer just the health counselling sporting cultural radio—or whatever—services that people have talked about; they are making a substantive difference to the quality of the tuition and teaching that is happening within the classroom as well. 
It would be good to look at the management of student services. This is something that I know Heather Roy has talked about before. I agree with her that some of the student services that have been offered and some of the student management that has happened in some of the universities and many of the polytechs have simply not been up to scratch. Fairly young students with perhaps very little management experience are asked to manage large amounts of money on behalf of the student body and I agree that the management of that money and the way that it is accounted for is something we should look into and something we can improve. I think the university students associations—certainly the national body—are in agreement with that. 
Lastly I would say that the review might want to look at the way that the different institutions vary amongst each other. The students association in a large body such as Otago University might be somewhat different from that in a small polytech or even a private training establishment in the way that it functions.