Ideology should never exclude compromise

Every time Brendan Nelson opens his mouth, I feel like putting my hands over my ears, while singing as loud as I can: "la la la la la la la". In my opinion, there are few things scarier than a politician so uncompromisingly driven by ideology. Nelson's position on VSU is a timely case in point. His position is so stubbornly narrow focused, and void of rational thought, that I hold great fear for Australia's universities, the students that attend them, and the future of the "university experience".

The core argument for Voluntary Student Unionism is that students should not have to pay a compulsory fee for services considered peripheral to their university experience. In essence, the argument is that university services should move to a user pays model, whereby students who wish only to attend their lectures and go home, may do so without subsidising services for others. The key argument against this is that all manner of services currently available to students either free, or highly subsidised, will no longer be available, or at the very least, will be unaffordable to the average student. This includes services such as student advocacy, legal advice, health and counseling, child minding, social activities, clubs and societies, and sport. From an ideological view point, the debate is a classic left-right split. However, as many on both sides of the political spectrum realise, student services and campus life is not really the battle ground for such an ideological war.

I found it particularly encouraging to read on The Age's website this morning, an article reporting the findings of a research fellow, Andrew Norton, who was an adviser to the former federal education minister, David Kemp. Norton makes the case for compulsory "union" fees, on the basis that under VSU, costs of services will inevitably rise and therefore discourage students from using such services, leading to a reduction in available choices. Given this take on VSU, and other similar views expressed by experts, and even MP's within government ranks, I find it incomprehensible that Nelson can take such a hard and ideologically driven position on this issue. The only motivation that appears to make sense, is that this government is fixated on silencing the student voice, a voice that often speaks out against them. My greatest fear is that if the VSU legislation is passed in its current form, while some initial opposition will be heard, the student voice, and the university experience as we know it, will die a slow and silent death.

PARSA has just launched a postcard campaign around campus. Postgraduate students are being asked to sign the card, and send it to one of three senators considered fence sitters on the issue (and yes, good ole' Barnaby is one of them). The VSU legislation is likely to be voted on when the senate resumes next week.