Update me on VSU (1 Viewer)

[Iron]

The senate favours little parties -unrepresentative swill.

 

[maniacguy]

You make a terrific argument, very cohesive and well structured. However, I must say that, although eloquently written as it was, I must disagree with your viewpoint. You spent a great deal of time discussing why you do not feel that you should, in effect, be paying for services you aren't neccessarily using, but really, isn't that the nature of our society? Aren't most tax payers paying money to the Government, a portion of which will go to a service they are in now way benefited by? By your logic, someone who is unmarried and without children has the right not to pay all of their tax, because some of it will be spent on services (Education, for example) that in no way benefits them.

This is the selfish attitude that I believe VSU promotes. In your argument, you seem to have raised a very valid question - "Why pay fees for something that will not benefit me directly?"

Because the services provided by Student Unions contribute to the well-being of every student of the University. The fees you are paying go towards many services - counselling, health/dental care, food, etc - that benefits the majority of your student population. Without these services, it is likely that many students are unable to afford them outside of the university. You are indirectly affected by the payment of fees. Without Student Unions, the students have no voice, or no say in the goings-on within the university.

I agree with you, in part, when you say that you object to your money being used to fund a "piss up", and this, I believe is the only argument that Pro-VSU people have to substantiate their claims. Yes, it is wrong that money you are paying is spent on alcohol and the likes for students. Remember, though, that there is another view to that story. You may not accept that some of your fees are being spent on these so-called "piss ups", in the same way that, for example, a homophobic person may object to a portion of their fees being used to fund sexuality counsellors, and organisations.

In money payed as Tax to the Government, various things are then funded which I do not agree with. For instance, I am not overly fond of the Private school system being Government subsidised, not to mention the exorbitant amouts of money being spent on an unjust war. But, it is part of our duty as citizens to ensure not only our own wellbeing, but that of everyone else. You may disagree with your money being spent the way it is, but I am very much assured you are better off now then you will be after the Unions collapse (due to no funding).

Finally, I should like to express my disdain for the latest news on the VSU saga. One Government official (whose name escapes me) has asked that it be "proven that VSU will affect Universities". This is the most pathetic thing I've read in a long while - we are asking to prove the effects of something which, until effective, has no effect. To use a simple analogy: That is the same as saying that you will be shot in the head, unless you can prove that it will cause damage.

Don't wait until the Government pulls the trigger.

Thanks for the compliment - much nicer to try discussing something with someone who doesn't start namecalling (this is a not-so-subtle hint to all and sundry in the later stages of this thread!)

I agree that most of my points end up going towards an argument that operates along the lines of "Why pay for something not directly affecting me", which probably means I should have taken a bit more care writing it. My intention was something more or less like "Why pay so much when the benefits currently being supplied are so little compared to what they could be if efficiently administered".

I'm not saying everything provided by the student associations at various universities are useless - clearly this is not true, and some services are extremely admirable. Moreover, I gather from some of the other posts that some services which at UNSW (my uni) are provided by the university (e.g. Counselling services) are provided by student associations at other universities, in which case the discussion becomes somewhat murkier.

I just feel that student unions are not the most effective way of providing these services - I think it would be better for the university to hire appropriate managers to run them, and perhaps take on students at a much lower level. My main quibble is that the services being provided are not being provided in the most effective manner.

In regards to subsidised food - that's certainly not an issue at UNSW (I can guarantee that the places near the campus provide cheaper food, and as I said in my earlier post, I think the uni could make more money by leasing the facilities out to such franchises, provided they retained one or two spots for 'healthy food' type options - these operations then act as a safeguard in case I'm wrong about the prices as well, since they can be subsidised and provide more competitive alternatives in the event of price hikes). I can't necessarily speak for other universities, though.

I consider your argument that the students have no say in the goings-on within the university to be amongst the more compelling ones against VSU - the students generally have representatives on major university decision-making bodies (e.g. university councils, but don't have the final say on any given body, so are vulnerable to sudden changes from those bodies and student associations provide the most effective lobbying group.

As I said, there are aspects of VSU in its current form that I have concerns about, and what I truly support would probably be a modified form of USU that works by proscribing what student unions can spend money on (hint: anything that does not provide on-campus direct benefits to students gets shot). I still believe it's better than the current system.

A couple of years ago, I would have agreed with you. Having been through most of my uni life now, I have become extremely disillusioned with the processes that are in place (one could argue it's the people, not the system, that I have an issue with, but quite frankly, I can't see a way to fix the system without dismantling it), which is the major cause behind my changed heart.

The system is inefficient, and changes won't occur unless it comes under genuine threat.

Oh, and I agree with you on the Government minister's comments. I tend to agree with those who suspect that the current VSU agenda is not driven by any sort of concern for students but by ideological beliefs and vendettas from decades ago when current Ministers were aspiring student politicians who discovered that the Left had control of student politics.

Whatever the motives though, it can only improve what exists now, in my view.

 

[MoonlightSonata]

Maniacguy and thatjazz, can I just commend you both on your interactions above

(Edit: literally the one above. I hope you can bring this method to all your future posts.)

Exemplary way to express your arguments in my opinion. Well detailed, clear, polite and fruitful. And you even complimented each other - what a pleasure it is to read!

 

[ogmzergrush]

Ten points kids, it's been a pleasure!

 

[withoutaface]

Maniacguy and thatjazz, can I just commend you both on your interactions above

Exemplary way to express your arguments in my opinion. Well detailed, clear, polite and fruitful. And you even complimented each other - what a pleasure it is to read!

Hahahhahahahhahahhahah

 

[MoonlightSonata]

(I was referring to their resolution posts between each other btw)

 

[Generator]

I'm sure that we all complimented each other at some stage of the debate, moonlight, it's just there comes a time when frustration tends to shine through. With that in mind, it would be nice if some of those who have just entered the debate realised that this is hardly the first of its kind on this forum, and that even though our most recent posts may appear rather 'light' in comparison to their own, the regulars have outlined their positions at length in the past and as such assume that there is no real need to repeat what has already been said (in however many other threads).

 

[Meldrum]

awww I want a gold star from moonlight!

That should replace rep, gold stars.

If a Mod chatches you being good; gold star.

 

[walrusbear]

Having read this, I believe the anti-VSU arguement can be summed up as follows:

Without compulsory membership of student associations, it is likely that many student associations will be unable to sustain their current wide range of activities, which help turn the student body into a cohesive vibrant community rather than a collection of individuals who just want to get a degree and get out.

The benefits of these activities extend to all students, and so it is fair to expect all students to pay for them, but in an environment where this is not compulsory, it is just too hard to stop people from trying to get benefits without paying. As this occurs, more and more people will stop paying and get benefits, at which point the association goes broke.


The pro-VSU position (which I happen to support - I'm not completely happy with the current VSU proposition, but I believe that it is better than retaining compulsory student unionism regardless of this) is that:

Yes, some of the activities student associations fund are acknowledged to be of universal benefit, and all students should pay for them. But too many of the other activities conducted by the association are wasteful, and serve only the interests of a handful of students, never to be taken up by the majority.

Why should the part-time student who cannot be on campus during the day to take advantage of these services be denied their use, and instead subsidise the full-time student who chooses to skip classes to carry out these activities? (I believe this was Brendan Nelson's example, though he mentioned a single mother subsidising rugby).

Now, my proposed solution is that the conducting of these valuable activities be taken away from student associations and be placed in the hands of the university administration, with managers with appropriate experience hired to fulfil those positions. Let the funds be added to the university's funds, and let the amount of money (if any is to be charged) be added to the HECS bill.

Services that are deemed truly necessary, such as subsidised childcare, will still be retained (at heart, because the political fallout from trying to cut them would be too great), but I doubt greatly that a manager aware that his/her continued employment hinges on the ability to demonstrate genuine use of the money collected would be inclined to fund student protests.

Why am I `taking power away from students'? Because quite frankly, I don't think students have demonstrated that they have the capacity to adequately handle the funds that are being entrusted to their care, and I think genuine expertise is necessary.

Because I object to my money being used to subsidise trips away from the university that often result in a vast amount of subsidised alcohol being consumed - I accept that clubs are entitled to help their members bond, but the promotion of a drinking culture (particularly given the problems society already faces as a result of binge drinking) is something I am firmly against. (I have been on such trips and seen the effects - and for the benefit of anyone who believes my position as a result to be hypocrisy, the clubs running those activities would have been easily capable of raising the funds to subsidise the trip with or without the existence of the Guild (more on this at the end).)

Because I object to my money being used to subsidise a giant pissup that encourages activities which in many cases are outside the law and claims they are harmless pranks (aka UNSW Foundation Day - the Scavenger Hunt often involves stealing items, and whilst the Student Guild claims officially not to condone it, student publications (Tharunka in particular) frequently speak about the traditions of Foundation Day as involving outrageous activities). I believe that if students want to do that, they can damn well pay for it themselves.

Because I object to my money being used to fund political positions that I do not support, and if pressed to give an opinion on, would most likely oppose (a la campaigns in 2003 and 2004 to 'Free the Refugees'), on the grounds that the office bearers of the Guild seemed to think it was appropriate.

Because I object to my money being used to subsidise activities whose participation rates have been so low relative to the costs involved that their survival can only really be put down to tradition (Foundation Day again).

Because I object to the fact that students' money is being used to fund the excesses of a small group (Melbourne Uni Student Union - recently placed into administration, I believe - and Macquarie Uni's SAM, riddled with corruption).

Because I object to any of my money going to the National Union of Students, and to their president being considered a voice for students in Australia, when quite frankly I agree with almost none of his statements.


To those who protest that subsidised food will disappear, guess what? McDonald's at Kingsford sells meals for lower prices than individual burgers go for on the UNSW campus. There are already two private providers on campus, and with over 30,000 people a DAY on the UNSW campus, it is not hard to think that many many more would jump at the chance to get there. It would only be necessary to subsidise one or two food outlets if for example a vegetarian shop were deemed a necessity (not guaranteed by any means).

To those who claim that not all clubs can afford to carry out activities without funding - if the club's activity is considered of benefit it may still be subsidised, but there will need to be a case made regarding its benefit, rather than simply allowing clubs to claim subsidies up to certain amounts. I am not advocating the abolition of all activities, but their proper management and the elimination of those activities that are simply wasteful of students' funds.

In addition, there are always sponsorship opportunities - if universities are the pathways of elite sport, surely national sporting bodies would be prepared to spend the funds needed to keep sporting clubs running at a sustainable level? If theatre and the arts are of such essential importance (and there is no doubt a place for them), then surely the Federal and State Governments would be willing to subsidise young artists? No, the clubs that suffer will be clubs that are unwilling to stretch themselves to look at the opportunities in the wider world, but have grown accustomed to relying on handouts.

I haven't thought through all the arguements, but damn it feels good to get that off my chest anyway!!!

VSU policy doesn't allow for that
universities are fined a lot of money for trying

 

[STFU]

VSU policy doesn't allow for that
universities are fined a lot of money for trying

some services should be funded by the university, ones that are basically necessary.

 

[walrusbear]

Stupid analogy. They were educated, were they not?

i've seen the tax analogy rejected by the cons on this board a million times but always by missing the point
the two are not identical
however, the analogy is made to point out something that is willingly ignored by the cons: sometimes you have to pay for things that don't directly benefit you.
it highlights the fact that a society functions when everyone contributes to it.

 

[walrusbear]

some services should be funded by the university, ones that are basically necessary.

yeah but the liberal government presumably doesn't want that
gavin brown spoke out against the stupidity of the policy saying that usyd would start issuing a similar fee to the union fees that would be managed by uni admin.
the policy was changed to fine universities up to millions for doing so

 

[walrusbear]

and quah, what's the go?


"But the protests also represent everything that most people detest about the student movement. We're loud, we're disruptive, we don't give a shit about anybody else, and we'll screw over who we have to to get what we want."
www.andrewquah.net

wtf?
why do you pretend to have a voice of reason on this whole subject?

 

[STFU]

yeah but the liberal government presumably doesn't want that
gavin brown spoke out against the stupidity of the policy saying that usyd would start issuing a similar fee to the union fees that would be managed by uni admin.
the policy was changed to fine universities up to millions for doing so

are u sure that all services currently carried out by the union are under this?

 

[walrusbear]

am still yet to see pro-VSU argument explain why the quality of university campus' in the country should suffer
are you all opposed to international standard tertiary education?

 

[walrusbear]

are u sure that all services currently carried out by the union are under this?

i believe so
it's essentially preventing ANY form of universal payment
whether be for culture, sport or welfare

 

[mattsta]

I support VSU...

Nuff said..... You green haired unionists better find money else where.

 

[Xayma]

i've seen the tax analogy rejected by the cons on this board a million times but always by missing the point
the two are not identical
however, the analogy is made to point out something that is willingly ignored by the cons: sometimes you have to pay for things that don't directly benefit you.
it highlights the fact that a society functions when everyone contributes to it.

It also highlights the idea that society functions when those who can afford to contribute more do so and those who can't contribute as much don't.

 

[walrusbear]

I support VSU...

Nuff said..... You green haired unionists better find money else where.

excellent argument
with this sort of insight i'm not surprised VSU has support

would anyone like to argue for VSU without a lame attack on the old stereotype of lefties and unions?

btw, why are unions universally loathed at the moment? are they really any more corrupt than every other type of organisation? why is there a deep distrust for unions, but bizarre wholesale trust in university admin and corporate culture etc.

 

[walrusbear]

It also highlights the idea that society functions when those who can afford to contribute more do so and those who can't contribute as much don't.

so you're pointing out that a lot of people should i paying cheaper union fees?
because i agree, there should be better distribution of fees. long distance and part time students should be paying a lot less than full time. and realistically, everyone could be paying a lot less (at USYD anyway).