Kedgley Sue: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Kedgley Sue: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21078] 
SUE KEDGLEY (Green) 
: 
 The Green Party would strongly support the proposal by Labour to amend the transitional provision. We agree wholeheartedly that it is absurd to have this Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill come into effect on 1 January next year and that a much longer transitional period will be needed if there is to be a smooth transition once this rather unfortunate bill passes in this Parliament. As previous speakers have said there is no question that some of the services will fall over. The universities are very worried about trying to negotiate and take over some of the services from the students associations. There is a huge amount of work to be done and it is completely unrealistic to expect it to be done by 1 January next year. Therefore we need to change the transitional provision. 
One of the Labour speakers said that if the intention of this bill was not to destroy students associations then the Government would readily agree to amend the transitional provision. Unfortunately I am afraid that that is the ambition not just of the ACT Party but indeed of the Government and that is what this bill is about—destroying students associations in New Zealand. As we said in our Green Party minority review undermining the membership and financial viability of students associations will reduce student democracy reduce student participation and reduce students’ voices on university and polytechnic boards. Let us be absolutely clear that that is what this bill is about. It is about trying to destroy student democracy student participation and the student voice. 
Like many people in this House I was on a student executive—the Victoria University student executive—and that was a very radicalising positive political experience for me. That radicalised me. I participated fresh from a private school for young ladies. I found myself on a student executive and it radicalised me. I was involved in student protests student marches on Parliament and so forth. 
That is what the Government does not want to happen. The Government does not want students to be radicalised or to be involved in student politics. It does not want students to have a strong voice. Indeed once the Government has destroyed the student unions and the student voice it knows that its next proposals are to undermine universities and university funding. The Government anticipates it will not have opposition if for example it were to do things like change the student loan scheme because by the passage of this bill it will have undermined students associations it will have undermined the student voice and it will have undermined student radicalism. That is what this bill is about. 
Let us not have any pretence that there is any other purpose to this bill. Let us not pretend it is about freedom of association or some vague ACT principles. That is what the bill is about—trying to destroy student democracy student participation and the student voice. But unfortunately in setting out to destroy those things it will also destroy some extraordinarily valuable university student services. Many of them will fall over. They will be a further burden on the universities which will have to pick up these services particularly if we do not amend this transitional provision clause and this is all supposed to happen somehow in a couple of months’ time by 1 January. 
I cannot understand—well I suppose I can really—why National would be so intent on destroying student democracy student participation and the student voice. Perhaps it feels that students might be the ones who oppose the market economy or oppose some of the Government’s policies such as selling off our State assets.