The latest fortnightly Morgan poll has Labor’s two party lead down from 57.5-42.5 to 56.5-43.5. Labor’s primary vote lead over the Coalition is 46.5 per cent (up 0.5 per cent) to 37.5 per cent (up 1.5 per cent). Morgan also brings us qualitative research on voters’ “concerns” with the way the parties and leaders are going about their business. More attitudinal gear this week from Newspoll, whose thrice-yearly survey on issues and the parties best equipped to tackle them was published in The Australian on Wednesday
I think this proves that GP is in fact Sophie Mirabopoulos.
[Also, you still haven’t given any in principle reason why the union should provide student services.]
I’ve actually said it 5000 times, you’re failure to recognise that is a problem on your behalf, not mine.
You keep pretending that the options are somehow “No services” or “union run services”.
The choice is “University administration run services” or “Union run services”. I would much rather that students run programs for themselves than the university administration.
[Are you/were you a student union official or employee?]
No. If you read what I posted earlier, you would have seen that I criticised unions for being factional playgrounds of Labor.
[then I think you need to consider that your position is far from mainstream.]
I relish not being in a “mainstream” position, considering what the “mainstream” is.
[I’m connecting the dots, so to speak, because it’s a logical conclusion. If they don’t want to pay for union services, they don’t want those services.]
If you read the second half of my post you’d realise that students are paying for those services, only to have the university run them in a lot of cases.
Services on campus have not disappeared. They still exist because universities recognise that students want them. Why else would they pay millions of dollars of year to run them?
Why in these difficult financial times when students already are under financial pressure should be made to give 250 dollars up for nothing i repeat NOTHING!
This is just stupid! Typical ALP raising taxes…Students should refuse to pay it on mass. Do you honestly think students would rather 250 bucks in their pocket or to have to give it to the University!
[Why should I be forced to pay for the legal system, when I’ve never used it in my life?]
There you go again comparing student unions to governments. STUDENT UNIONS ARE NOT GOVERNMENTS.
[Now either you accept that they should exist, and that all students should have equitable access to them, or you don’t.]
This argument is ridiculous. I accept that student services should exist, but only where students indicate a demand for them. The clearest indicator is payment of union membership fees. Since most students do not pay fees, they do not desire those services.
[But the arguments in favour of taxation at government level to provide services can also be applied to campus level. Especially when you consider that services aren’t going to magically disappear, because students actually want them, contrary to what GP keeps saying.]
No, the same arguments do not apply because governments hare held accountable for their decisions. There are mechanisms in place to ensure that funds are not misused or embezzled. There are much more stringent accountability measures. They are completely different to a student union.
Thus, it is disingenuous to proclaim that it is appropriate to compel the whole student body to subsidise the social lives and activist intentions of a small proportion of students.
[Why? That promotes inefficiency and waste.]
Anytime you don’t use government funded legal advice it’s “inefficient and wasteful” yes? “Accountability” doesn’t apply here, it’s the principle.
[Do you honestly think students would rather 250 bucks in their pocket or to have to give it to the University!]
Better question – Do you think students would rather have $10K in their pockets and have to give $50 to unions, or do you think they’d rather be $10K and $250 out of pocket for a worse result.
How can Student Unions be Governments when less than 20% of Students vote in elections…they are hardly democratic or fairly representative of all Students hence they have no legitimacy to call themselves governments and justify ‘raising taxes’ it is a weak argument!
No 353
Then that is their choice if they want the university administration to run those services.
That is your problem: you refuse to accept the notion that students should have a choice.
[The clearest indicator is payment of union membership fees.]
No, you’re wrong and you won’t admit. The clearest indicator is how much the university pays to run services. For example, UNSW and USYD gave almost $10 million to student run services. Because they recognised that students want them, and it’s a positive for the university.
[How can Student Unions be Governments when less than 20% of Students vote in elections]
I never said they were governments, though GP likes to pretend that I did. I merely use the same principle of everyone chipping in to provide services for… everyone, whether they think they need on January 1st or not.
[Then that is their choice if they want the university administration to run those services.]
Explain when students got a choice?
No 356
[Anytime you don’t use government funded legal advice it’s “inefficient and wasteful” yes? “Accountability” doesn’t apply here, it’s the principle.]
Yes, accountability does apply. There are many levels of accountability which apply to governments; none of which apply to student unions – with the exception of a perfunctory annual election. You cannot compare student unions to governments.
The University charges students thousands to write essays and get a diploma i dont think they are struggling for cash they already get enough out of students!
It is there job to run some services that is the responsibility of the Institution and they get enough money from enrolment fees to cover this and if they arent they arent running their affairs well enough.
Many students dont want services they want to go to University and learn, go home and work. They dont want to spend their lives at Uni.
[You cannot compare student unions to governments.]
Good thing I never have.
Now where talking about a different issue, philosophically, where you on the right disagree with the idea of being taxed to provide for services that you won’t ever use. If you believe the opposite, then there’s no reason why that can’t be applied to any other level of society – including on campus.
[No, you’re wrong and you won’t admit. The clearest indicator is how much the university pays to run services.]
I am not wrong. You believe in compulsory levies and compulsory membership of student unions. I do not and neither do most students.
[They dont want to spend their lives at Uni.]
Then they don’t have. I don’t have kids and don’t want subsidised child-care, so it shouldn’t exist. Right? And no, do not even think about “accountability” because your issue with the notion of provision of equitable services through a “levy” or “tax” (which is already occuring) is ideological. If the Liberals issue with student unions was a “lack of accountability” how do they propose to make them “more accountable”? And how exactly is the university administration “accountable” to students?
Glen 362
“The University charges students thousands to write essays and get a diploma i dont think they are struggling for cash they already get enough out of students!”
Well to be fair that one I disagree with – many university administrations here are desperate for cash, with the current funding formula plainly inadequate compared to many OECD nations. Try running courses like medicine or engineering on current payments per student. I agree with you on VSU, but not uni funding.
Oz, just so we have an idea… what services do you think are essential in regard to universities?
[I do not and neither do most students.]
Except that they already are being forced to pay for those services and so you have no way of testing whether or not they actually want them.
[what services do you think are essential in regard to universities?]
I’ve said about 35 times what services I think should be provided for students.
They are regulated Oz. Unions never are.
[Now where talking about a different issue, philosophically, where you on the right disagree with the idea of being taxed to provide for services that you won’t ever use.]
Not necessarily. I don’t use the public health system, but I support it, for example. I don’t believe in zero government. That would be pointless.
My philosophical objection comes from the desire for those on the left to compel people to pay compulsory fees to unions; or compulsory fees to universities which then distribute them to student unions. Unions are not accountable. Governments are. That is the primary and most important difference which is why your attempts to coalesce ideological principles about how governments should run with how unions should run, falls flat on its face.
No 369
Yeah, two of them were legal advice and chilcare facilities – already subsidised by the state and federal governments. Why should students be compulsorily subsidising the duplication of services?
Oz are you referring to clubs, student papers and sports?
I don’t see how any of those are essential or how they can’t be supported by students who want to take part in them? The student papers are the most dubious of those examples and could be solved by just releasing electronic papers at law cost (e.g. voluntary writing, no paid positions in the staff and running of advertisements where necessary).
Are there other services you’re referring to?
[They are regulated Oz. Unions never are.]
You have no idea what you’re talking about.
In fact, I would argue that the student unions are more accountable in the provision of services that the university administration. Let’s take a look at child-care. Union run child care services have a board which consists of members of the elected student union, management, consumers, and the university administration. What exactly is ‘lacking’ in accountability? Again, the same argument for student clubs and volunteering programs. Run by elected students with university oversight as well as constituent oversight through member clubs.
I can only hope Mr X and Steve Fielding support the Opposition!
elected by 20% of students hardly democratic!
[Yeah, two of them were legal advice and chilcare facilities – already subsidised by the state and federal governments]
There is no “duplication” of university run child-care centres catering specifically for students.
No 374
Oz, you still haven’t answered my question. Why do students need to subsidise a service already subsidised by the federal government?
[elected by 20% of students hardly democratic!]
So removing all student representation makes it more “accountable”? Doesn’t make sense.
I have to go to lunch, good discussion. Have a good day.
No 376
Often far, far less than 20% Glen. I participated in UNSW elections, wherein a student populace of 40,000 exists, but only 1100 voted. 2.75% is hardly a commanding mandate, is it?
No 379
Who said that we wanted to remove all student representation? Those are your words, not mine.
[Why do students need to subsidise a service already subsidised by the federal government?]
See above.
Why should education unions subsidise their own legal advice services… why should police unions… why should nurses unions…
They apply specifically to students, and if you had any experience with what they do (I do, specifically in child care centres) you would understand that there are stark differences in the goals of the organisation and the service provision as compared to your ABC learning.
Glen, Joyce supports the ALP on this matter so if he gets the Nationals in the Senate to vote with him (as you would presume the leader would do) then Fielding and Xenophon’s vote will be irrelevant.
[Who said that we wanted to remove all student representation]
University run services, which are the actual alternative not “no services” would have no student representation.
I actually have to go now, lol.
No 382
One key difference Oz: Teacher unions, nurse unions, police unions all have voluntary membership.
Oz, should membership of unions in general be compulsory?
He wont though lol!
No 384
Just because universities run some services does not mean student representation has been abolished. Your argument is nonsense and disingenuous.
I’m not sure I particlarly understand why the decision was made and announced by Kate Ellis either.
LTEP
I suspect Ellis is Mininster for attracting positive media coverage.
Minister for umming and ahring, Socrates. 🙂
ABC midday news, student rep complaining about the fees being controlled by the Uni and that there is no return to compulsory union membership.
No student union controlling the money, no compulsory union.
So, what exactly are the reds under the bed brigade complaining about?
The compulsory levying of fees from students for dubious ‘essential services’.
This is soooo booooring.
Oh is that all. I got the impression from the first 3 posts on the topic that there was some other concern.
[quote]Generic Person
Posted Monday, November 3, 2008 at 1:14 am
Kate Ellis reinstates compulsory communism at universities:
Mary Hannah Wade
Posted Monday, November 3, 2008 at 2:20 am
For one i agree with my collegue across the aisle – this will just restore the ‘good old days’ of student unions being able to run far left wing campagins supporting Hamas and the PLO (among others) and day trips to dention centres
ltep
Posted Monday, November 3, 2008 at 5:23 am
GP I agree with you on VSU/CSU. /… [/quote]
No 393
If the services are absolutely essential, either the university will assume funding responsibility or students will willingly and voluntarily pay for them.
PAAPTSEF we don’t know exactly how the scheme will work yet. It depends on the details whether it is essentially a return to CSU under a different name. For instance, does ‘control by the university’ allow the universities to decide to give all the money to the student union and allow them to decide how its used?
It’s not a surprise really that criticism of government policy will get you named ‘reds under the beds brigade’.
The last couple of hundred posts have been pretty dull, but I can’t let GP’s outburst at 314 go unreported:
[ Garrett’s murder of the Music Academy. ]
I know you’re highly strung, but is something this hysterically shrill really necessary? It’s hilarious, though. 😉
By the way: the only thing I was wondering about The Great VSU Debate is… why did Kate Ellis make this announcement? She’s youth minister. I thought the education minister would’ve made it… now that I think of it, I don’t know who that is.
“It’s not a surprise really that criticism of government policy will get you named ‘reds under the beds brigade’.”
Only if that criticism moves miles away from the policy to “compulsury communism” 🙂
Well GP is well known for being provocative.
Bird of Paradox, the Education Minister is none other than Julia Gillard.