Robertson Grant: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Robertson Grant: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21093] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 New clause 10 that is in my name is an important addition to this Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill because by extending the debate around clause 10 we are trying essentially to make sure that students have all the information they need to be members within students associations. It is important in saying we are putting forward a new clause 10 that the bill gives us the opportunity to ensure that students associations can survive. That has been the concern raised on this side of the Chamber and it has been accepted by National on the other side of the Chamber that the bill is not about destroying students associations. So if the bill is not about destroying students associations then we need to provide a way in which students associations can continue to exist. The new clause 10 I am proposing will insert in the principal Act a new section 229D “Institution to provide association funding” which states: “Every institution where a student association exists— 
The CHAIRPERSON (Lindsay Tisch) 
: A point here to the member: he is speaking on the wrong new clause 10. The one he needs to be talking about which is in scope and which I have agreed to have debated is “Review of Sections 229A to 229CA”—review of sections. 
GRANT ROBERTSON 
: I was not aware because when you announced the new clause 10 Mr Chairperson I was not sure which of the excellent new clause 10s we were allowed to debate. This one allows for a review of the changes that have been made because one of the things we have noted in the past when changes have been made to membership of students associations is the use of referenda and the use of review of provisions after a certain amount of time. This again is something that National has previously said was an acceptable thing to have happen with students associations and this particular clause 10 would allow for reviews of the passing of particular clauses that have previously been in the Act. This allows students to continue to have a voice in how they are organised because we have to remember that fundamentally what the previous clauses we have agreed to in this bill do is actually take away choice from students. The current clauses that are within this new part have in the past given students the ability to have some control over their affairs but by removing those clauses and bringing in the new clauses that have been passed that choice is actually taken away. We have to have the capacity to review those clauses and to be able to say to students that they have an opportunity in front of them within 5 years to see whether the provisions are working to see what their impact has been on the provision of services and also to make sure that students have a say. 
The new clause 10 that we are debating as opposed to a future clause 10 that we may debate shortly requires a review of sections 229A to 229CA which have been included. Proposed new clause 10(1) states that the Ministry of Education will run this review and that it will be 5 years after the date on which the legislation receives Royal assent. Clause 10(2) states: “The review shall assess the impact of the provisions on students and the tertiary sector in accordance with the terms of reference established in subsection (3).” Proposed new clause 10(3) states: “The terms of reference for the review shall be set out by the Minister of Education.” and proposed new clause 10(4) states that the Ministry of Education will then report back to the Minister of Education and the Minister for Tertiary Education. This clause is about a 5-year review of this change. 
It is important because the evidence we have internationally is that student services disappeared when voluntary student membership arrived—in particular in Australia. Seventy-five percent of the services provided by students associations disappeared under voluntary membership. That had a huge impact on the experience that students had in their institutions. So the new clause 10 I am proposing would allow for a review to see the impact of the legislation on students. There has been a lot of debate. We believe that the evidence internationally shows us what the impact will be. But here is the opportunity for the National Government to say: “Alright we accept that we need to look and see what will happen when this legislation passes. We accept that there could be detrimental effects on students.” National members might try to argue that in fact it will be a positive thing for student services. Let us have a review and look at that. That is what new clause 10 does. I suggest that after 5 years is a good length of time to be able to do that. 
Now that I am on the right clause there are a few more points to make. It may well be that some of the impacts of this bill will not appear immediately. Students associations may well be able to survive for a period of time based on their reserves in an attempt to try to attract some members. It is perhaps difficult to do that at the start of a calendar year. The impact will emerge over a period of several years and what this clause does is allow for a review after 5 years from when the legislation receives its Royal assent. It is important we do this because what is being done tonight will effectively change the nature of student experiences right across the tertiary sector. It is no small thing. It is not as some would say just a technical change that allows students the freedom to do whatever they want; it fundamentally will undermine the experience of students in tertiary institutions. 
We have already heard tonight from Te Ururoa Flavell about the action that is being taken by Te Mana Akonga. Te Mana Akonga is addressing a very specific matter which is the role that the Maori students associations on campuses and at a national level play in the experience of Maori students. Not every student arriving at a tertiary institution is in the same place. Not every student arriving at a tertiary institution knows what will happen to them when they are there. I know from my time in students associations and in more recent times from working in the tertiary education area that the strength of Maori students associations and indeed of some other student groups that help support groups within tertiary institutions is the key to the success of those students. Having a body of students that is able to support other students of the same ethnicity or in the same experience group has made a real difference to the lives of those students. So the change that is being made tonight merits a review clause of this type because it is a significant change. It is a change that will affect the very well-being of students who attend tertiary institutions. I think the issues that Te Mana Akonga is raising within its claim about what kind of experience students from different backgrounds have when they come into a tertiary environment are very very legitimate. Students associations over the years have worked very hard to be able to provide support to those students. 
It is also the same with international students. There is a different experience again for international students coming into a foreign environment and not only not always understanding exactly how the institution works but also not understanding the customs and the interactions that they are not familiar with that go on between students. Students associations have provided a vehicle for that and it is a significant vehicle. It is also the other services that students associations have created over the years. Student Job Search was essentially created by students associations and on the initiative of students associations. The very existence of things like Student Job Search has made the difference to some students being able to stay and finish their studies. 
The changes that are being proposed tonight in this bill fundamentally alter the experience of many students and the legislation deserves a review that will take into account what has happened if this bill passes. As I say all the evidence we know about from overseas is that the legislation will be detrimental but in New Zealand we need to see it for what it really is and for the impact it will really have on students. 
The other part of the clause is about exactly who will be doing this review. It should be the Ministry of Education. The ministry will be impartial and will not take into the review any baggage around the past activities of students associations. That is not politicising the review; it is saying that the Ministry of Education will look at the legislation. There is an important point in that. The Ministry of Education should do the review because what students associations do is support the educational outcomes of students. This is a very important signal to be given that actually what students associations do is about educational outcomes. There has been a lot of talk in this debate about unions and about why if we do not have compulsory unionism outside of the tertiary sector we should have it inside. It is because that is a fundamental misunderstanding of what students associations are. They are democratic bodies of students who make the choice to be students and at that point become part of a greater whole which is the student body. By law since as Mr Shearer said earlier the late 1950s and early 1960s we have made the decision—