Ms KING (3:49 PM) —It is hard for me to say that I am pleased to second the matter of public importance put forward by the shadow minister for education, because there is little to be pleased about in the government’s attacks on student services. It also means that I have had to sit in silence—something that is difficult for me to do—and listen to the nonsense spouted by the Minister for Education, Science and Training. The government’s ideological preoccupation with abolishing compulsory up-front student union fees is nothing more than an unhealthy obsession—an obsession with destroying student organisations; an obsession with destroying any organisation that has dared to speak out against this government. It is an abuse of government power and shows how little the government respects students and the services that help to support them through university.

It shows just how desperate this minister is to get himself noticed amongst all the other Liberal leadership aspirants on the other side of the House. But I like to think of it, as our leader most aptly described it, as being a case of revenge of the nerds—the nerds fighting lost battles of 20 or 30 years ago. The reality of the government’s attacks on student services is that they are payback—nothing more than that. They are payback for students running a campaign against the government’s HECS fee hike, payback for the students campaign against Howard’s broken promise of no $100,000 university degrees and payback for the minister’s own early political aspirations, so cruelly squashed within Labor student politics.

Australian people involved in the higher education system will be quick to tell you that this government has absolutely lost the plot, and students are paying the price. Students are now facing an inexcusable increase in HECS fees of over 25 per cent and we are now seeing full fee-paying courses costing over $200,000—something this minister mockingly claimed we would never see happen in this country. He is strangely silent about that now.

The attack on student services is no more starkly apparent that on our regional campuses. The University of Ballarat in my electorate greatly contributes to enhancing the social fabric of the Ballarat community. A large number of students who attend the university come from low socioeconomic backgrounds and rely heavily on services at the university such as child care, subsidised eating facilities and employment placement to make ends meet. These services are provided by the Ballarat university student association.

Additional services provided such as tax help, assistance for clubs and societies and provision of recreation and sporting options combine to assist students to relieve stress, help students more fully benefit from their educational experience and, more importantly, help reduce drop-out rates. Regional campuses are tightly woven into the surrounding community and have a large emphasis on supporting their local community. One of the key ways this is done is through nurturing students with their social and welfare needs. Students face a number of challenges when studying, and common challenges are social isolation from their normal support networks, particularly in regional universities. They face isolation from families and friends. When students fail a grade, where do they turn? They turn to university student associations to help provide advocacy and to navigate their way through complex university structures. Without this advocacy, students will drop out and not complete their studies.

How can the government be so out of touch with reality that they do not see the need for student associations at regional universities? Regional campus student organisations have no desire to be a political force. In fact, in the history of the University of Ballarat I have never seen our student association act as one. But I can tell you what you have managed to do, Minister; you have managed to politicise our student association. They want to fight with you over this issue. They now want to fight with you over VSU. They have never been a political force before, but you have now managed to make them exactly that. In many cases, it has been the first time that many student organisations have ever actively engaged in anything vaguely looking like a political campaign. I tell you what: they sure are in for a fight now. Student associations exist as a representative body for the students at the university and do this by providing services and support that enhance the entire university experience of students.

Regional universities such as mine also prosper as a result of the large emphasis on clubs and societies and sporting involvement. Over 40 per cent—approximately 2,060 out of the 5,500—of students at the University of Ballarat are involved in sporting and non-sporting clubs. Over 10 per cent—approximately 550 of that number—have taken advantage of subsided gym memberships. This involvement opens up opportunities for students to overcome isolation which subsequently results in a greater quality of academic life. The government’s ideological obsession jeopardises this interaction within the student body. Students need the support and other services that student organisations provide. But once again the Howard government is out of touch and believes students can afford user-pays services—on top of their massive HECS debts, on top of their study costs, on top of paying rent and on top of paying for food and other essential living expenses.

What will students lose as a result of this government’s ideological obsession and attack on student associations? To provide a snapshot, I need to look no further than my own university. The students at the University of Ballarat will lose subsidised gym memberships, which currently cost around $102 a year but the cost under this legislation would be $369 a year; attendance at university games, which currently cost $600 but under VSU would be $1,000; subsidised creche facilities; free student diaries; employment placement services; help in finding accommodation, which is a very difficult thing to do in Ballarat; clubs and societies; and activities and social events.

The government has increased university fees but does not adequately support students with their living or study costs. Now the Howard government is taking away the ability of students to socially interact with others at university through sport and recreation, and it is taking away the ability of students to have the support of other student services. Labor have proposed a way out for the government. Bailing the minister out of his own mess is not something we often like to do, but we thought we would provide some options for him. We have suggested that he should be able to allow student organisations to preserve child care, counselling services, sporting fields, gymnasiums and the representation provided by student associations, but the government seems set to press ahead. Now we are hearing that maybe it is wavering a bit in saying that it might provide a National Party slush fund. That might benefit a regional university like mine, but in my electorate students from Bacchus Marsh, which is still a rural area, go to VUT. How is it fair that students in Bacchus Marsh who go to VUT would still not be able to access student services, but if the same students living in Bacchus Marsh went to the University of Ballarat they would? It is complete and utter nonsense. You need to be very careful when you are negotiating a slush fund of what the impact will be on rural students such as those who live in rural areas on the outer fringes of metropolitan Melbourne, like Bacchus Marsh.

The university will still exist if this legislation goes through, but what is proposed will kill the social fabric of university life. The university will still exist, but at what cost? The possibility of enhanced retention rates will be a thing of the past; taking part in lunchtime activities will be a thing of the past; attending Australian university games will be a thing of the past; and the ability to seek assistance from student services will be a thing of the past. At what cost? It will be at the cost of the government’s ideological obsession.

The Australian Vice-Chancellors Committee has said:

Fifteen jobs at the University of Ballarat alone are at risk because of this government’s ideological obsession. Why will the government listen to the vice-chancellors when it suits their agenda but refuse to be swayed by them when it does not? As my colleague the member for Lyons so aptly growls each question time, it is because of arrogance.

We have also recently seen almost 200 submissions to the Senate committee, and out of those 200 submissions it is very hard to find anyone who is in support of these changes. Students are clearly saying that they do not want this, and vice-chancellors are saying that they do not want this. The only people saying that they want this are the government, and even they are not singing from the same song sheet. Besides this blinded government, is anybody in Australia supportive of these inappropriate changes? Even members of the government’s coalition see how stupid these changes are—and they are stupid changes; it is the only way to describe them. It is not just some Nationals who have developed a bit of backbone on this issue; members of the Liberal Party itself are now telling you, Minister, that you have got this wrong.

Senator Alan Eggleston, the Liberal senator from Western Australia, put his finger on it exactly. Some of the ideologues in the Liberal Party are misusing the words ‘student unionism’, failing to recognise their historic connection with Oxford debating societies. You have been obsessed with the notion of unions and crushing unions. That is what you have really been focused on in this legislation. Of course, if students do not want to belong to their student union at the moment, they do not have to. I think the government has really gone on this ideological rampage against student associations, against student unions, because of the name ‘student union’. This complete ideological zealotry by this minister has to end. You need to back down and look at sensible solutions to continue to provide student services. You have some proposals on the table, so have some backbone and have some courage to come into this place and change your mind on this issue. (Time expired)