Lees-Galloway Iain: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Lees-Galloway Iain: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:671;Page:17583] 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) 
: 
 Obviously I had not made it very far into my contribution when we were last considering this bill. Clause 4A goes to the heart of one of the questions that members on this side of the Chamber have about this bill. The member in charge of this bill Heather Roy said that she does not want to see the end of students associations and that her intention is not to destroy students associations. But clause 4A amends the principal Act to delete any reference to students associations on the tertiary institutes’ councils. The original section that it deletes section 171(2)(e) refers to having students on the council “in the case of an institution at which membership of a students association is compulsory in accordance with the constitution or rules of the association;”. Obviously this bill changes the compulsory nature of it. There is absolutely no need whatsoever to remove any reference to students associations. 
So I speak in support of the amendment proposed by Grant Robertson which is to replace the current clause 4A with wording that includes “(i) following an election (conducted in accordance with statutes made by council) by the students at the institution where no student association exists at the institution; or (ii) by a student association where such an association exists at the institution:”. That clause seems to sit perfectly reasonably with the intention of the bill if the intention of the bill is not to see the end of student associations. 
I think the problem with the way the clause is worded at the moment is that it is quite inflexible in dealing with the way in which different student associations might be structured at different universities and polytechnics and with the way they might operate. I will use the example of the student representation on the Massey University Council because at Massey University a number of students associations represent its different campuses and its extramural students. Students have three representatives on the university council and they use their right to appoint people to the university council to ensure there is adequate representation of internal students extramural students and Maori students. That approach to representation on the council has been student-directed; it has been decided by students and it can be changed by students because students have control over the way they are represented on that council. 
But the current wording of the bill we are looking at says that all that power to decide the way in which students will be represented on the council would sit with the institution itself. So the university the polytechnic the wananga or the private training establishment—whichever organisation we are talking about—would have the decision-making power about the way in which students would be represented on that institution’s council. 
The whole point of having student representation on those councils is to ensure that there is a student voice at the highest decision-making body at those institutions. That is completely undermined by the way the bill is written at the moment because students would not be able to decide the process by which they decide who represents them. That decision would sit solely with the institution itself. I suppose the member in the chair might make the argument that students on the council could have a say in that.