Doorstop Interview - 22nd May 2007
SMITH: Well, just some comments this morning on the Sydney Morning Herald story on student unionism and services to students at Universities.
Labor at its recent National Conference adopted a platform item which has the effect that Labor supports and will legislate to support the capacity of students to organise themselves into a representative body. We also support the provision of decent amenities and services to students on campus.
I also made it clear at the National Conference, and this was acknowledged by a number of delegates, that it wasn’t appropriate for Labor, and Labor would not be able to go back to the pre-Voluntary Student Unionism world and that was accepted by the Conference and accepted by delegates.
Labor’s priority here is to do two things as outlined in the Platform: Firstly, to ensure that students, if they so choose, can voluntarily organise themselves into representative organisations. Secondly, and more importantly, that all students have access to decent amenities and services, whether that’s sporting facilities, cultural facilities, child-care facilities and the like.
The funding of those services has been a matter of conversation between me and the Universities. I believe that the Commonwealth, the Government of the day, has a responsibility, together with the Universities, to fund those services and of course it’s also appropriate for students, if they so choose, to make a voluntary contribution to those services, or indeed to be charged a fee if that is appropriate when they use those services such as sporting facilities, gyms and the like.
When the Government moved to the Voluntary Student Unionism approach it said it would effect transitional arrangements to ensure those services were secured. Now you only need to speak to Vice Chancellors and students at campuses to know that those services are now declining. The so-called transitional arrangements effectively saw the Government give some capital grants to rural and regional Universities or for sporting facilities.
I am in detailed discussion with the Universities and with interested parties like the National Union of Students and Young Labor about the detail of our election commitment. Our commitment is to ensure that students, if they so choose, can organise themselves into representative bodies on Universities, but most importantly to ensure that University students get the chance to receive those amenities and services that have previously been provided by Universities on campuses.
I’m happy to respond to your questions.
JOURNALIST: So on the funding side, have you canvassed, or are you contemplating some sort of loan or deferred payment?
SMITH: No, absolutely not. One thing I can absolutely rule out is that I am not considering a HECS style arrangement, particularly a compulsory HECS style arrangement.
I don’t know where that came from, that may have been a suggestion made by one of the interested parties to the journalist concerned. But I certainly do not have on my list an extension of HECS, either voluntary or compulsory, to fund these services. So I absolutely rule that out.
JOURNALIST: So what is on your list then?
SMITH: What is on my list is that I believe that these services should be provided either by the Universities, or by the Commonwealth or both. And that’s what I am in discussion with the Universities about, whether it’s appropriate for the Commonwealth to make a contribution, whether it’s appropriate for the Universities to finance these services. Of course, if students want to voluntarily take part in student organisations or voluntarily take part in student groups which access these services, then it may be appropriate for them to make a contribution themselves. But the primary obligation in my mind rests with the Universities and rests with the Commonwealth.
JOURNALIST: Are you considering a compulsory amenities fee on students?
SMITH: No, well, firstly I am not considering a HECS style arrangement, I’m not considering a compulsory HECS style arrangement and the whole basis of the approach is one of a voluntary approach. So I am not contemplating a compulsory amenities fee.
JOURNALIST: So no compulsory student union fees, no compulsory facilities fee in any way, no compulsory fee for services…?
SMITH: Well, that point was made by my predecessor Jenny Macklin who spoke about opting in arrangements and that’s the same point I made in general terms to the Labor Party National Conference, that we couldn’t return to the pre-VSU world.
JOURNALIST: It sounds like you want the Commonwealth to pick up the bill, or the majority of the bill for this. Do you know how much it’s going to cost?
SMITH: Well, as I have said I am in discussion with the Universities about the appropriateness of either the Commonwealth or the Universities or both, making a contribution to those services and amenities.
JOURNALIST: Is this another example of where Labor is moving its policy to the centre?
SMITH: Well, I think it’s an acceptance of where we are now in 2006. My predecessor Jenny Macklin, I think made the point clear in the previous Parliament and earlier in this Parliament, that what she was focussing on and looking at were voluntary or opt in arrangements. When I made the point to the National Conference that I didn’t believe that we could go back to the pre-VSU world, that was acknowledged by a number of delegates at the Conference.
So I think it’s an acceptance of where the campuses and the Universities now lie. I also think it is an acceptance that the most important thing here is the provision of adequate amenities and services to the students. Now whether it’s child-care arrangements, whether it’s sporting facilities, cultural activities and the like, those amenities and services I think are a very important part of the whole of University experience and they shouldn’t be allowed, as they are under the Howard Government, they shouldn’t be allowed to deteriorate.
JOURNALIST: The National Union of Students says that you should be implementing some sort of compulsory but deferrable system. You’re going to get students across Australia offside aren’t you?
SMITH: Well, there may well be issues in respect of this, whether it’s the National Union of Students or other bodies who would prefer to go wholly back to the past. Well, on those matters we’ll have to agree to disagree. I think what we’re doing is looking to the future for a sensible, relevant policy approach that works.
The key thing here is do we want to allow students to group together and voluntarily form representative organisations on University campuses? Yes, we do. And we will facilitate that by legislation. And in a sense, more importantly, do we want the amenities and services to be there? Yes, we do. And the Commonwealth and the Universities in my view have an obligation in that respect and that’s what I’ve been speaking to Vice Chancellors about.
JOURNALIST: Are you saying the Government has got it right in its Voluntary Student Unionism?
SMITH: Well, it’s not a position that we would have moved to. We’ve made that clear over the preceding Parliaments. It’s an acceptance of where we are now and it’s looking to the future to ensure those services and rights are there.
JOURNALIST: But it’s still a U-turn on Labor policy?
SMITH: Well, it’s not a u-turn on Labor policy because this was discussed at the last National Conference and it was accepted by the Conference and the delegates that this was the way we were going. It was also made clear earlier in the Parliament by my predecessor Jenny Macklin that what we were focussing on were voluntary or opt-in arrangements.
JOURNALIST: So the only difference between you and the Government is that Labor will either force Universities to pay for student facilities, or the Government itself will put dollars into this…
SMITH: There are two qualitative differences. One, we believe that students have a right to join together if they so choose and for representative organisations to play a role in University life. The Government has persistently had an ideological approach which has sought to prevent students from joining together in that manner.
Secondly, the Government, because of its transitional arrangements, isn’t actually serious about actually ensuring those services and amenities are provided. We want to ensure both those things and in my conversations with Vice Chancellors, they themselves recognise that there is a responsibility there on the part of the Universities, either in whole or in part, to provide these services as part of a whole of University experience.
Now, I also happen to believe that the Commonwealth itself should contemplate making a contribution, just as students themselves should make a contribution and those matters, as I’ve said, are the subject of conversation and consultation between myself and the Universities and other interested parties and they will be the subject of a detailed election commitment in due course.
JOURNLAIST: The Vice Chancellors are going to be getting a fair chunk of money out of this Endowment Fund. Do you see any time in the future where they can dip into that to pay for these amenities and services for students?
SMITH: Well, the Endowment Fund is for capital purposes and we’ve indicated that we support the Endowment Fund and I wouldn’t be proposing to disturb the Endowment Fund from capital purposes.
JOURNALIST: But capital purposes could include a basketball court or something like that at a University?
SMITH: That is true, but I’m not proposing a diversion from the Fund for the provision of recurrent services.
JOURNALIST: Can I just confirm, was that the ALP Conference last month…
SMITH: The one in Sydney, which the Sydney Morning Herald seems to have missed.
JOURNALIST: That’s when you dumped your commitment to Voluntary Student Unionism.
SMITH: That’s when I made it clear to delegates at Conference, as other delegates made it clear in their contribution, that we couldn’t go back to the pre-VSU world, underlining and reinforcing the comments that my predecessor Jenny Macklin had earlier made about voluntary or opt-in arrangements.
JOURNALIST: So Labor can wind back a major national policy like industrial relations but it can’t wind back fee payment at Universities?
SMITH: Well, there is a qualitative difference between the most ferocious attack on the entitlements and conditions of working Australians, and about how the provision of services and amenities at a University campus is provided. The key thing here is, do we believe that students, if they want to, should be able to organise themselves into representative bodies? Yes, we do. Do we believe that amenities and services should be provided? Yes, we do. And our detailed election commitments and our policy approach will ensure both of those things
JOURNALIST: Do you think Mike Bailey is going to give Joe Hockey a run for his money in North Sydney?
SMITH: I do actually. I think Joe will be watching the weather much more closely in the future.
JOURNALIST: 10 percent, it’s a big margin?
SMITH: It’s a big margin, but no, I think Joe will be spending more time at home watching the weather, of this I am very confident.
JOURNALIST: Do you think the Government’s indulging in extravagance by looking at dining room chairs…
SMITH: Absolutely. This is a Government that is completely out-of-touch. The only time we see the Government doing anything in a policy sense is when they are driven to do something because Labor’s done it first and there’s an election down the track. And the only time they stop gorging themselves at taxpayers’ expense, whether it’s dining rooms, dining room chairs, or taxpayer funded advertisements, is when they’re caught out.
You know, this Government has changed. John Howard has changed. They’re not interested now in the long term future of our nation. They’re not interested in the Australian people. They’re simply gorging themselves, thinking they can get away with it. They only do something these days when they’re caught out, they only stop doing something when they’re caught out.
JOURNALIST: Inaudible…do you see something in the dining room episode?
SMITH: What I see is a Government that has been there for 10 long years, that has fallen completely out of touch, only does things when it’s interested in trying to get elected, only stops doing things when it’s caught out.