VSU and you - real choice or the end of campus life? (2 Viewers)

[banco55]

I don't know where this guy gets his figures from but here are some of the things UQ's student union spent the money on:

• The Women’s Collective, a small group of activist feminists, receive approximately $150,000 per year in support from the Student Union. This money is spent on activities such as sending members to surf and meditation camps on the New South Wales North Coast. Needless to say, ’services’ like this are an extravagance and of no benefit to the average student.
• The Queer Collective, a group open to gays and lesbians on campus, receives similar levels of funding and spends it in similar ways.
• The Food and Wine Appreciation Society, a small group of people who regularly eat-out at some of Brisbane’s most expensive and elite restaurants, at the expense of the University of Queensland Student Union.
• The High Society, my personal favourite, is a group of marijuana smokers whose stated goal is to promote drug-law reform, but in fact organize for drug dealers from all across Brisbane to gather once a week on-campus to sell to UQ students. One of their trading sessions was recently stormed by the police, however they still meet regularly and still actively deal drugs to students on campus. Needless to say, this ‘essential service’ is subsidised by the Student Union.

http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/people/rohde/blog/?p=26

Sounds like money well spent.

 

[neo o]

So far at the ANU:

1. The university has pledged to bail out our union financially. Umelb is taking similar action.

2. The union has cut off nearly all financial support to college resident's associations. Union sponsorship was used to support both sporting and cultural activities (i.e. college plays and art shows). To my knowledge no college event has been cancelled, and all have found sponsorship outside of the union either through college alumni, local businesses or through the college itself.

3. It's rumored that the cost of union membership will fall from around $240 to around $100.

4. The union is trying to hold on to its collectives and departments. Last year they created a new Aboriginal department (which was a little pointless considering that the 100 or so Aboriginal students on campus have access to the federally funded Jabal center which provides them with widescreen televisions, free photocopying and etc). That aside, I don’t see the departments vanishing any time soon (unfortunately).

5. This may be because of the holidays, but there are alot of people missing from college - I'd say only a tenth of the hall is still in Canberra. I'm assuming that most have gone home for the holidays - but I'm open to the possibility that a few people have been killed off by the "homocaust". I haven't considered the possibility that the "VSU kills queers" slogan was anything but serious. I can't imagine that the NUS would lie to me.

I haven’t heard of any other services being cut. Then again, since the ANUSA isn’t anywhere near as large as SA’s in Sydney and Melbourne I can imagine that the universities funding will go a long way and service cuts and price hikes will be minimal at best. I’d like to see more privately owned restaurants on campus, I'd like to see the departments shrunk (and shrunk good damnit), I’d also like to see the beer and money spinning schemes used by SA board members in clubs like the debating society eliminated, I’d like to see the prices of Sport and Rec activities increase (except for tennis please >.<) – but I suspect that the same old crap will be happening post VSU.

(The advocacy budget may be a little higher because after all, the union needs to impotently fight the legislation. FIGHT ON MY BRETHREN! FIGHT THE MAN!)

 

[yy]

i'm a woman, i'm queer, i like drugs and fine food. i definitely would join all these groups in UQ (if vsu hasn't been brought in)

 

[Xayma]

I don't know where this guy gets his figures from but here are some of the things UQ's student union spent the money on:

• The Women’s Collective, a small group of activist feminists, receive approximately $150,000 per year in support from the Student Union. This money is spent on activities such as sending members to surf and meditation camps on the New South Wales North Coast. Needless to say, ’services’ like this are an extravagance and of no benefit to the average student.
• The Queer Collective, a group open to gays and lesbians on campus, receives similar levels of funding and spends it in similar ways.
• The Food and Wine Appreciation Society, a small group of people who regularly eat-out at some of Brisbane’s most expensive and elite restaurants, at the expense of the University of Queensland Student Union.
• The High Society, my personal favourite, is a group of marijuana smokers whose stated goal is to promote drug-law reform, but in fact organize for drug dealers from all across Brisbane to gather once a week on-campus to sell to UQ students. One of their trading sessions was recently stormed by the police, however they still meet regularly and still actively deal drugs to students on campus. Needless to say, this ‘essential service’ is subsidised by the Student Union.

http://www.physics.uq.edu.au/people/rohde/blog/?p=26

Sounds like money well spent.

Generally there is a limit as to how much money an activity can get. For USYD for a non-major event that is $4 per union member, it is the same whether it is a fine food club or a fish and chips club.

 

[banco55]

i'm a woman, i'm queer, i like drugs and fine food. i definitely would join all these groups in UQ (if vsu hasn't been brought in)

You still can join/create groups like that they just won't be subidised by your fellow students.

 

[The Brucemaster]

Im seeing a major problem in a number of pro-VSU arguments here and elsewhere and its the use of the word 'I'.
"I don't want to support X."
"Why should I support Y?
"I would like to see Z abolished."

Great. Fantastic even, so because one person doesn't like/want to join/agree with a service that the Union provides it should be abolished? Utter nonsense.
Let's look at the practical implications of VSU:

1) Consider how many students attend University, thousands.,
2) Consider the variety of opinions/ideas/ideologies amongst those thousands of students.
3) Consider the likelihood of gaining a reasonable amount of support for certain services amongst such a diverse population.

The fact is that many services that may seem wasteful/inappropriate or whatever to one person may be essential to another.
Furthermore simply because you don't use a service provided by the Union is not to say you should not support it in the form of a general contribution.

 

[Xayma]

Im seeing a major problem in a number of pro-VSU arguments here and elsewhere and its the use of the word 'I'.
"I don't want to support X."
"Why should I support Y?
"I would like to see Z abolished."

Great. Fantastic even, so because one person doesn't like/want to join/agree with a service that the Union provides it should be abolished? Utter nonsense.
Let's look at the practical implications of VSU:

1) Consider how many students attend University, thousands.,
2) Consider the variety of opinions/ideas/ideologies amongst those thousands of students.
3) Consider the likelihood of gaining a reasonable amount of support for certain services amongst such a diverse population.

The fact is that many services that may seem wasteful/inappropriate or whatever to one person may be essential to another.
Furthermore simply because you don't use a service provided by the Union is not to say you should not support it in the form of a general contribution.

Then those services should have enough support to survive. Things like Buffy Soc don't really need much union funding, and have small active memberships (active being like 12), you are asking people to fund 12 peoples interests to the same level that other groups such as the EU which has a much higher active membership (both have a cap on amount of union funding they can recieve it is irrelevant the active size).

 

[Not-That-Bright]

Great. Fantastic even, so because one person doesn't like/want to join/agree with a service that the Union provides it should be abolished?

The service won't be abolished because one person doesn't like/want to join/agree with it. It will be abolished if many do not.

 

[Captain Obvious 1]

Why can't there be a high society at my uni?

 

[neo o]

Im seeing a major problem in a number of pro-VSU arguments here and elsewhere and its the use of the word 'I'.
"I don't want to support X."
"Why should I support Y?
"I would like to see Z abolished."

No, the use of the letter “I” in those sentences is grammatically correct. However, I’m seeing a major problem in your usage of letters besides “I”. What is an X? What is a Z?

Great. Fantastic even, so because one person doesn't like/want to join/agree with a service that the Union provides it should be abolished? Utter nonsense.

Utter nonsense indeed! I’d say that there is more than one person who supports VSU.

Let's look at the practical implications of VSU:

1) Consider how many students attend University, thousands.,

K. That's alot.

2) Consider the variety of opinions/ideas/ideologies amongst those thousands of students.

K. There are heaps.

3) Consider the likelihood of gaining a reasonable amount of support for certain services amongst such a diverse population.

Unlikely.

The fact is that many services that may seem wasteful/inappropriate or whatever to one person may be essential to another.

Ok, so your argument is (essentially)
Premise 1: Alot of students attend university
Premise 2: These students have different opinions about... stuff
Therefore, it's ok to fund services that students don't want! Particularly if a minority wants them, because those services may be useful to one person in a community of a few thousand! AWESOME!

Furthermore simply because you don't use a service provided by the Union is not to say you should not support it in the form of a general contribution.

And just because you don't use services offered by peg-legged, green-eyed light house keepers doesn't mean that you shouldn't support them in the form of a general contribution.

I give you an A for effort Brucemaster.

 

[banco55]

Im seeing a major problem in a number of pro-VSU arguments here and elsewhere and its the use of the word 'I'.
"I don't want to support X."
"Why should I support Y?
"I would like to see Z abolished."

Great. Fantastic even, so because one person doesn't like/want to join/agree with a service that the Union provides it should be abolished? Utter nonsense.
Let's look at the practical implications of VSU:

1) Consider how many students attend University, thousands.,
2) Consider the variety of opinions/ideas/ideologies amongst those thousands of students.
3) Consider the likelihood of gaining a reasonable amount of support for certain services amongst such a diverse population.

The fact is that many services that may seem wasteful/inappropriate or whatever to one person may be essential to another.
Furthermore simply because you don't use a service provided by the Union is not to say you should not support it in the form of a general contribution.

If you have a look at the variety of opinions/ideas/ideologies that the student unions tended to support they were nearly all to the left of center (often very far left). So if you argue that there are a variety of opinions/ideas/ideologies amongst those thousands of students I'd say that's an argument FOR VSU.

If they had stuck to supporting 'core' activities like say healthcare, renting graduation gowns etc., possibly childcare and academic mentoring they wouldn't have left themselves so vulnerable to criticism. Of course one of the reasons that they were willing to support all the BS that they did is because they were spending other people's money. I'd guess the core activities could be funded easily if each student paid $50 a semester.

 

[walrusbear]

The service won't be abolished because one person doesn't like/want to join/agree with it. It will be abolished if many do not.

so appeasing a theoretical 'majority' is the utmost responsibility?

 

[walrusbear]

This is a question of responsibility:

With Childcare, it is the parents of the child and the government's joint responsibility to take care of it. Not students. Just because you *can* force us to help out, doesn't mean you *should*. Lobby for Governments to do more, lobby for Universities to do more. Just don't pick on the students.

With every other service, well they are of negligible use. The health services at usyd are, i'm fairly certain, sponsored by the university, not the union. The union funded events which excluded me (which is fine, as long as anyone can get funding. But it doesn't work that way - only Left types get the funding).

A lot of people are making this out to be Serious Business. It isn't. Student Unions CAN survive by redesigning themselves and solving the democratic deficit crisis.

Another good step would be to stop viewing Student Unions as a branch of government. They aren't. They also aren't charities. They are minor organisations which should stick to administration, not producing big noting politicians. Get over it, you won't get on a Senate Ticket because you protested against Howard.

In Conclusion: Not Serious Business. Don't expect to see the level of abortions and suicides go up over this.

i agree with all of that except the beginning

does anyone have a reliable estimate of spending from the USYD union in regards to childcare???

 

[Not-That-Bright]

so appeasing a theoretical 'majority' is the utmost responsibility?

No, not really. I just wanted to point out the idea that services are going to be abolished on the whim of one person is wrong. Services will be abolished on the whim of a great many people, that is if post-vsu money is allocated based on a services popularity.

 

[loquasagacious]

I don't have time to dig through the old threads but as abit of perspective on the clubs and societies issue I believe that the percentage of the budget spent on them was well below 10%. Or such is my memory of some stats bought up in an old thread.

Having perused the Sport and Rec Associations VSU plan I can only conclude two things:
-They have no concept of management.
-It was made intentionally harsh to enduce people to support USU.

 

[transcendent]

It's going to go and nothing's going to change this. However, to those that do support VSU, you are without right to complain about the consequences.

 

[katie_tully]

There's no reason a responsible university student who leaves having children til later life should have to subsidise the choice made by an irresponsible student in having children when they will obviously conflict with their studies. Good to see the unions are finally recognising this.

They also talk about laying off staff without showing a direct problem to the student body arising from this. Maybe these staff were already deadweight and the union just needed a little push to have an excuse to sack them?

That's a little harsh.
I for one do not expect anybody else to foot the bill for my childcare expenses, least of all my university or other students.
Instead they should focus on a means of study that does not leave them dependant on university services, or defer.

Thank god USU is over. I want to be able to say 'I told you so', when the crucial benefits are still in place but the useless fringe benefits that came with USU disappear.
Get lives and stop expecting others to foot the bill for your 'holistic experience'

 

[walrusbear]

Thank god USU is over. I want to be able to say 'I told you so', when the crucial benefits are still in place but the useless fringe benefits that came with USU disappear.
Get lives and stop expecting others to foot the bill for your 'holistic experience'

i'm not sure which specific services you're referring too, but it appears to be a narrow minded view of things. just because it doesn't appeal to you, doesn't make it inherently 'worthless'
the credibility of the universities is weighted by these 'worthless' extra-curricular services currently funded by the union. it would be a shame to diminish the quality of our unis because of this heavy handed policy.

 

[volition]

heavy handed? what about how money is taken from people to go towards unnecessary stuff they don't support? that sounds more heavy handed to me

 

[banco55]

I don't think you will get a reliable estimate, though I have read the claim that 85% of the kids at the Childcare aren't actually the children of uni students.

If there was an 'essential services' fee, or even just call it a Childcare fee, i'd pay it straight up. I still get the feeling that these are being bundled up with the political crap though.

That's the crux of the matter I think. If they'd stuck to a few non-partisan things that they did well it would probably still be around. Though there's an open question as to why students should be involved in running stuff at all.