Robertson Grant: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Robertson Grant: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:675;Page:21083] 
GRANT ROBERTSON (Labour—Wellington Central) 
: 
 I too will respond to some of the comments made by Heather Roy. In particular I will respond to her suggestion that an attack on democracy comes from the current arrangements that students have. Well the current arrangements that students have allow students to have control over student affairs. They are allowed to elect their representatives. They are allowed to approve a budget that includes what services will be provided. The situation that we will be left with now if this bill passes is that the decisions about those things will go out of the hands of students and will go into the hands of administrators within tertiary institutions. How is that promoting democracy? How is that helping students to have control of student affairs? 
The word “choice” has been bandied around a lot by the member in charge of the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill and on the rare occasions that National members have got up to speak about why they are supporting this bill. Well choice means nothing if it is not informed choice. That is what Chris Hipkins was just talking about. Informed choice about whether to join a students association would see the amendment in my name passed because it would allow students associations to communicate with their members. It would allow students to actually be aware when they arrive at a tertiary institution of what services are on offer and what advocacy the students association provides. But instead the real agenda of the member in charge of the bill is to destroy students associations for political reasons. The bill is not actually about choice because if it was about choice—if it was about real choice—then information would be provided to students so that they could make that kind of informed choice. 
Only one person is responsible for students associations and institutions being faced with transitional difficulties and only one person is responsible for an attack on democracy and that is the member in the chair because she is the one who has promoted this bill. It is all very well to attack Labour for having delayed the passing of this bill but there would be no danger to students associations if the bill had not been put forward in the first place. It is righting a wrong that is not there. It is an ideological attack on the rights of students to organise themselves and to decide what services they will get. Instead institutions will be in the situation where they will be making up their minds about that matter rather than the students. 
I was fascinated to hear Heather Roy say that she wanted to return to the original intent of students associations so I presume that she will be advocating for lady vice-presidents and for port to be served after all meetings. Things have changed. Students associations are different entities now. They are the providers of professional services. That is why all bar two institutions came to the Education and Science Committee and said: “Please do not pass this bill.” The institutions know that as time has worn on students associations have become even more important to the quality of education that is delivered in tertiary institutions and to the well-being and welfare of the students at those institutions. This bill in fact takes away choice it takes away democratic rights from students and it hands on to the institutions the decisions about what kinds of services students will have. 
I will also refer to the question of how this bill relates to polytechnics. I have in my hand a letter from the students association of Nelson Marlborough Institute of Technology which has raised the concern that the commencement date and the transitional provisions—which we believe should be expanded—do not actually take into account the situation for polytechnics. Heather Roy said that it was months before universities get going. Well that might be true. It is certainly not true for polytechnics. It is all very well to have in the transitional provisions something for polytechnic students who are part-way through a programme but students will be starting right away from 1 January 2012. I look at the letter here from the Nelson Marlborough Institute of Technology students and they are saying that in actual fact enrolment forms and invoicing for 2012 have already been generated by the institution. So here we are. We are in a situation now where the institution is already getting itself ready and this bill comes along and causes huge drama for them over that. 
The associations will have to change constitutions. A number of the institutes of technology and polytechnic students associations have quite different arrangements to universities because they tend to be closer to their institutions in some cases but they also have constitutional arrangements that give them independence. All of that is trampled on by this bill coming in in this way. Heather Roy said in her comments that she was waiting for the New Zealand University Students’ Association to come to her. I do note that it has been lobbying for some considerable time not only ACT but also National on this.