Mark Dreyfus (Isaacs, Australian Labor Party) Share this | Hansard source

rather than stifle their interests, which I am sure is what the member for Mayo, from his interjection, wishes to occur. He wants to see a stifling of involvement in political activity and a stifling of the richness of university life. We say it is completely appropriate to require all students to contribute to the services that are provided for their assistance. I am happy to be able to say that Universities Australia have argued very directly for the same view. I will quote from the submission that Universities Australia made to the Senate committee inquiry into the former form of this legislation in February 2009. They said:

… not all students may use these services during their study, but [Universities Australia] is firmly of the view that it is better for all students to contribute to the provision of the services, which are then available to all, than to not have the services available to those who need them. Additionally, such services will provide a safety net for those students who had begun their study with no need for the services, but whose situations change for the worse during the course of their study.

It is not different from the approach that successive Australian governments have taken to such matters as the Medicare levy, which is a levy imposed on all, even though everybody here and the entire Australian community would understand that not all members of the Australian community, happily, have need to avail themselves of the services provided and funded by Medicare, by that levy.

Students have experienced indirect costs caused by the so-called voluntary student unionism regime of the former government because universities have had to redirect funds that would have otherwise been spent on other aspects of university activities. Universities have had to redirect funds which otherwise would have been spent on research and teaching to fund services and amenities that, because of the voluntary student unionism regime of the former government and the reduction of funds available, would otherwise have had to be cut. The process will work in reverse. The reintroduction of a student amenities fee will help universities provide those services and allow them not to have to divert essential funds from research and teaching activities.

Again, I will quote from something Universities Australia said on the subject. It is the peak body representing the university sector. It said:

Universities have struggled for years to prop up essential student services through cross-subsidisation from other parts of already stretched university budgets, to redress the damage that resulted from the Coalition Government’s disastrous Voluntary Student Unionism … legislation …

It is also worth quoting from what the Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations said in November last year:

… this bill becomes an effective measure to restore and sustain quality student services for postgraduate students that are sustainable into the longer term.

It should be noted that the student services and amenities fee will not present a financial imposition on students because they will have the option to take out a HECS style loan as a new component of the Higher Education Loan Program.

The reintroduction of this vital legislation shows this government’s commitment to all Australians, including students. It shows a commitment by the Australian Labor Party to be the party which provides for and nurtures student learning. It meets an election commitment, which was to restore campus amenities, services and student representation—the effect of the Howard government’s legislation being that all of these were heavily cut. The bill will go a long way to reversing the disastrous change in the administration of our tertiary sector which began in 2006 with the coalition’s obsessive desire to destroy all things union. I predict, seeing that the member for Mayo is about to follow me, that we are likely to hear a yet further attack directed at all things union as the only possible basis for not supporting this legislation. I commend the bill to the House.

See this speech in context