Mr KEENAN (2:21 PM) —My question is addressed to the Minister for Education, Science and Training. Would the minister advise the House how the government plans to stop student union fees being used for political purposes? Are there any alternative views?

Dr NELSON (Minister for Education, Science and Training) —I thank the member for Stirling for his question. I can inform the member for Stirling and indeed the House that the government is intending to do this with a very simple proposition—that is, every one of the 700,000 Australians who go to university will be free to choose whether or not they will join a student union, guild or association.

I am asked about alternative policies. On Monday, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition gave a doorstop interview. It is a very interesting transcript. She was asked a question about who, under Labor’s plan, would actually collect the compulsory Labor fees that would continue under Labor’s plan. She said: ‘The universities—well, I’ll double check. It’s such a long time since we drafted it, actually.’ In other words, the Deputy Leader of the Opposition does not even know what is in her own amendment. But she went on to say: ‘It’s exactly what happens in Victoria now.’ So the Labor Party plan, as it is, is how student unionism currently operates in the state of Victoria.

So what happens in the state of Victoria? To give you some insight, the Australian newspaper on 25 October this year reported this:

The average Australian probably thinks, ‘Well, these are students who are having to part with their hard-earned money, many of them mature aged students getting an education.’ In terms of what that money is currently used for in the state of Victoria under the Labor Party’s plan, for example, it is reported in the Herald Sun of 23 November this year:

Let us make it absolutely clear. Under Labor’s plans, under the existing model in the state of Victoria, for those who support so-called amenities fees, we have student union fees, forcibly appropriated from students who have no interest in this at all, funding a speaking tour by a southern Iraqi oil worker. If you want to know what this organisation is about, go to the Guardian newspaper on 18 February this year. In an article from Hassan Juma’a Awad, who is the general secretary of this oil company union, he said this:

It is enough that there are some Australians who think that they should seek to undermine the integrity and sovereignty of our country, but that the Labor Party should seek to—

Mr Beazley —Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order on relevance. This government’s neglect provided Saddam Hussein with $300 million—

The SPEAKER —The Leader of the Opposition will resume his seat. That is not a point of order.

Honourable members interjecting—

The SPEAKER —Order! There is far too much noise. I call the minister.

Dr NELSON —Today in Iraq are Australian service men and women who are putting their lives on the line in the name of Australia to build a free Iraq, and the Labor Party—

The SPEAKER —The minister will resume his seat. The minister has concluded his answer. Does the member for Griffith have a point of order?

Mr Martin Ferguson interjecting—

The SPEAKER —Order! The member for Batman!

Mr Martin Ferguson interjecting—

The SPEAKER —The member for Batman is holding up his own colleague. The member for Griffith has the call.

Mr Rudd —Mr Speaker, I raise a point of order. The Prime Minister indicated earlier that, in the absence of the Minister for Foreign Affairs, the Minister for Trade was the acting foreign minister, not the education goose opposite.

The SPEAKER —There is no point of order.