Lees-Galloway Iain: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Lees-Galloway Iain: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21545] 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) 
: 
 There are I accept two schools of thought on students association membership. One is that when students choose to attend a particular institution—whether it be a university a polytechnic or anywhere—where there is a compulsory or universal students association by making the choice to attend that institution they then become a member of that students association in the same way that by deciding to live in a particular town they would have to pay rates and have everything that goes with being a ratepayer in that area. That is one school of thought. The other school of thought is that students associations are more like unions or professional bodies and that membership should be voluntary. 
I actually think that both of those points of view and schools of thought have merit. I do not think that one is more correct than the other. In fact the status quo allows for both of those situations to exist at a particular university or a particular tertiary institution. If the students decide they want their students association to be universal they can choose that. If they decide they want their students association to be voluntary they can choose that. So whichever side of the divide you stand on whatever your view is on membership of a students association there is actually a mechanism in the current law to make that happen. All you have to do if you want to create change— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Order! 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: Sorry. Well Mr Assistant Speaker you could if you were in this position. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Eric Roy) 
: Order! 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: All students would need to do if they wanted to change the status quo at their particular tertiary institution is to get 10 percent of their fellow students have a referendum and convince more than half the people who vote to come to their point of view. It is not so difficult. It happened at Auckland University where the students decided to go voluntary. 
Jacinda Ardern 
: And at Waikato. 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: It happened at Waikato University. Those students decided to go voluntary then they changed their mind. They saw the folly of that decision realised it was not working out and went back to universal membership. The question was asked at Massey University and its students decided to stay with universal membership. The status quo allows for both schools of thought to coexist. 
But even if we were to decide that we had to force the point of view that students associations must be voluntary this bill the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill is not the way to do it. A simple mechanism could have given students associations the opportunity to survive and imposed voluntary student membership on all students associations as well and that was to have an opt-out clause. Future students signing up for their first year would be automatically enrolled in the same way that we automatically enrol people into KiwiSaver. We do this in the workplace. We automatically enrol people into KiwiSaver and should they choose that that is not what they want they can opt out. That is the mechanism by which Heather Roy could have achieved what she says this bill is about. 
That is what gives the lie to Heather Roy’s motivation behind this bill. This bill is specifically designed to weaken and destroy students associations. There was a mechanism by which she could have achieved voluntary student membership but this bill is actually about making the environment as difficult as possible for students associations to recruit new members. How can we honestly expect— 
Tim Macindoe 
: How is that difficult? 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: Tim Macindoe is asking how that is difficult. I will answer Tim Macindoe’s question. The answer is simple. The Government is asking young people to decide before they arrive at the university polytechnic wananga or private training establishment—or whatever the institution is that they will study at—whether they think membership of a students association is a good thing. They have no idea what the students association does before they get to— 
Tim Macindoe 
: If they’re bright enough to be there they’re bright enough to work that out. 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: No I completely disagree. It is not a question of whether someone is bright enough I say to Mr Macindoe; it is a question of whether the information is available. It is ludicrous to expect students associations to make the information about what they offer available to every single potential student in the country. That is absolutely ludicrous. On the meagre resources that students associations have available to them they should not have to market themselves to every 17-year-old in the country. The universities already waste in my opinion millions of dollars marketing themselves to every 17-year-old in the country. Why should the students associations have to follow suit? There is absolutely no good reason why they should. 
The easy answer would be to have an opt-out mechanism. They are automatically enrolled— 
Tim Macindoe 
: Take away their freedom of choice instead. 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: No they are automatically enrolled and then they have the freedom of choice which this Government bangs on about so much to opt out at any time that they want to. If students arrive at the university and decide that they do not want their subsidised gym membership they do not want the advocacy service and they do not want the representation that is on offer they can walk away and get their fee back. It is a very very simple answer and it would ensure that the students associations had the ability to offer their services to the new students before the students had to make the choice about whether they would be a member. 
Here is another example right here in the bill of why this bill is more about destroying students associations than it is about giving students choice. Heather Roy Louise Upston and various other speakers have all stood up and said that the students association has to offer services that are relevant to the students and if those services are good students will choose to join the association. The only problem is that in clause 6 the bill states: “A person who is not a member of a students association may not be required to pay a representation fee to that association for any services that the association provides generally to the institution’s student body.” In other words freeloading is legislated here in the bill. Even if someone is not a member of the students association it is legislated that he or she will receive every single one of the services that the students association offers. So there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to join the students association. It could have the best services and it could have all the reasons why students should want to be a member but why would someone bother paying the additional fee if he or she got all the services anyway? That is legislated right here in the bill. 
This is not about student choice at all. This is about weakening and destroying one of the most powerful and influential political forces that has existed throughout the history of New Zealand. Students associations in New Zealand have had a voice for students. They have created change. Laws have been passed in this Parliament as a result of lobbying by students associations on behalf of their members and that is what this is all about. It is about destroying and weakening the voice that students have through their students associations. 
Ultimately what this will really mean for students is increased costs. We know that because in respect of the services that the students associations do provide the universities know that they will have to step in and the universities will not be able to do it at the cost level that the students associations are able to do it at. Furthermore should they choose to students ultimately have a say in how their students association fee is spent. They can go to a general meeting raise issues and elect the council and executive that they want to be running their students associations. If we take that out of their hands and give it to the tertiary institutions the students will have to pay but they will have no say. That is the fact of this bill. It takes away their voice it weakens their representation and it increases their costs. 
This bill is not about student choice. Let us be honest about what this bill is about. It is about taking away a representative voice for students that has had political influence over the years. The National Party does not like it the ACT Party does not like it but I tell you what the Labour Party thinks students should have that voice and when we are in Government we will give them that voice back.