Good VSU link from the Sports Factor

[injuryupdate]

Check out this link which has arguments for and against.

http://www.abc.net.au/rn/talks/8.30/...s/s1339346.htm

I know this site is biased against the VSU, but I still didn't hear any arguments from its proponents suggesting that more people would be able to play or access sport if VSU comes in.

Still have a vote.

[injuryupdate]

Next Monday at 2.30pm at Manning building at Sydney Uni, Tony Abbott and Julia Gillard will debate "Is the VSU good for you?"

Unbelievable that the health minister has put himself up for this one.

Obvious lines for Gillard to debate:

(1) If subsidies to student health services from union fees are removed and student health practices need to close or increase fees, how is this going to help the health of students?
(2) If sports participation drops as a result of sports facilities closing and sports clubs folding, what is going to stop inactivity rates rising further?
(3) If unis need to swing over to users pays, will Federal Libs be happy if gyms close down and are replaced by Donut King stores (because the fast food shop will make more money)?
(4) Will Abbott (who was a Sydney Uni rugby player) be celebrating if the Sydney Uni rugby team gets kicked out of the first grade competition because they can't afford to give any more rugby scholarships?
(5) Should an Australian elite athlete who also wants a University degree move to the USA when the sports scholarship money disappears next year?

However, so far Labor haven't landed any punches on this issue - interesting to see whether they can on the easiest target of all (the health minister).

[jess]

It seems like the only real aim of the federal government in proposing VSU is to prevent students from maintaining political organisations, thereby restricting the student voice, and undoubtedly opposition to the government. This seems anti-democratic.

To introduce VSU, yes, would prevent some of the spending by political organisations which are only supported by some students, but would predominantly have the effect of destroying many of the valuable services that are provided, including free counselling, interest free loans, baby sitting etc.

Sure, there are many students who claim they don't get anything from the union really and everyone's entitled to their own view on this. However, even though I have never used some of the services I mentioned above, I am glad they are there, and have had friends who've been very grateful for them.

I think this is in some ways similar to the mentality required for a democracy: you have to accept some spending allocations you don't like to enjoy those you do. Perhaps an apt analogy is strata fees apartment owners often are required to pay - often you may not like all of the things that money goes to, but to make such fees voluntary would mean that probably all services (including the ones you do enjoy) would be lost.

The thing that may need to be recongised more by the unions though is that students would appreciate a little more openness in the way money is spent - and perhaps a little more say. Maybe clubs and societies are receiving proportionately too much funding, without much accountability in the way they spend it, but this doesn't mean the whole thing should be completely axed. Perhaps a bit more flexibility on the part of the unions would result in more people saying "the union's great and I like/use the services provided".

Now, don't get me started on the proposed Industrial Relations changes...

[injuryupdate]

What a load of tripe! Abbott has decided not to debate in favour of the VSU because he is afraid of being assasinated at Sydney University.

I have never heard anything more ridiculous in my life (other than the suggestion itself that the universities should close down all of their amenities and replace them with donut franchises).