Bills Digest no. 39 2009–10
Higher Education Legislation Amendment (Student Services and Amenities) Bill 2009
WARNING:
This Digest was prepared for debate. It reflects the legislation as introduced
and does not canvass subsequent amendments. This Digest does not have
any official legal status. Other sources should be consulted to determine
the subsequent official status of the Bill.
CONTENTS
Passage history
Purpose
Background
Financial implications
Main provisions
Concluding comments
Contact officer & copyright details
Passage history
Date introduced: 9 September 2009
House: House of Representatives
Portfolio: Education
Commencement: The formal provisions commence on Royal Assent. Schedule 1
commences six months from the day of Royal Assent or earlier by Proclamation.
Links: The relevant links to the Bill, Explanatory Memorandum
and second reading speech can be accessed via BillsNet, which is at http://www.aph.gov.au/bills/ When Bills have been passed they can
be found at ComLaw, which is at http://www.comlaw.gov.au/.
The Bill amends the Higher Education
Support Act 2003 (the Act) to:
- Allow higher education providers to charge students an annual
capped compulsory student services and amenities fee from (‘on or after’) 1
July 2009, and
- Introduce a new Higher Education Loan Program (HELP) category for
student amenities fees called Services and Amenities-HELP (SA-HELP).
The Bill also amends the Income
Tax Assessment Act 1936 to account for the new SA-HELP provisions.
The issue of student services and
amenities fees, also called student union fees, has been before Parliament on
many occasions, most recently with the Higher Education Legislation Amendment
(Student Services and Amenities, and other Measures) Bill 2009 (‘the old bill’)
which was defeated in the Senate in August.[1] The ‘other measures’ relating to VET FEE-HELP in the old bill are now in a
separate bill.[2] The provisions in regard to student amenities fees are reintroduced unchanged
in the Bill.
Compulsory student union fees were abolished with the
passage of the Howard Government’s Higher Education Support Amendment
(Abolition of Compulsory Upfront Student Union Fees) Bill 2005.[3] The effect of the Higher Education Support Amendment (Abolition of
Compulsory Upfront Student Union Fees) Act 2005, is that section 19-37 of
the Higher Education Support Act (the Act) prevents a higher education
provider requiring a student to be a member of a student association, union or
guild and prevents a compulsory fee for facilities, amenities or services that
are not of an academic nature. Compliance with VSU legislation is a condition
of continued approval as a higher education provider and a condition of
Commonwealth grants to providers.
To allay concerns of National Party Senators and Senator
Fielding on the impact of VSU on regional campuses and on recreational and
sporting activities, the Howard Government provided $100 million of transition
funding to universities through three competitive funding programmes.[4] The VSU Transition Fund for Recreational and Sporting Facilities, allocated $85
million for 44 projects,[5] the Small Businesses on Regional Campuses Fund allocated $5 million for 19
projects,[6] and the Regional University Sport Programme is providing $10 million over four
years to Australian University Sport (AUS).
However the Australasian Campus Union Managers’ Association
(ACUMA) and AUS concluded ‘the grants available from the VSU Transition Fund do
not address the shortfalls in recurrent funding and provide only temporary
respite from the pressing capital needs of the sector’.[7]
In November 2007, after one year of VSU, AUS and ACUMA
reported an annual reduction of $166 million in funding from amenities and
services fees (they expected this to rise to $200 million in 2009), a loss of
1000 jobs (or a reduction in employment of 30 per cent), increased direct
charges to students and user pays charges increasing in most cases above the
Consumer Price Index (CPI).[8]
In February 2008, the Hon Kate Ellis MP, Minister for Youth,
undertook consultations with and invited submissions from stakeholders on the
impact of the current VSU policy. The Impact of Voluntary Student Unionism
on Services, Amenities and Representation for Australian University Students –
Summary Report concluded:
Most submissions concluded that the abolition of upfront
compulsory student union fees had impacted negatively on the provision of
amenities and services to university students, with the greatest impact at
smaller and regional universities and campuses.
Many noted that the introduction of VSU had forced
rationalisations, and that current levels of services were more limited than
had previously been the case.
In many instances, assistance was provided by the university
but these funds were redirected from other uses such as teaching, learning or
research.
While a ‘user‐pays’
model worked for some services (e.g. food and beverage outlets), it was
reported that this type of delivery commonly resulted in increased costs to
individual students.
Many submissions put forward the view that VSU had resulted
in a lessening of the vibrancy, diversity and, to some extent, the
attractiveness of university life.
VSU had commonly resulted in an increase in fees, which had
led to a decrease in the number of clubs and/or in club membership.
While most submissions focussed on the negative effects of
VSU on student services and amenities, some institutions did report some
benefits. These included the streamlining and more efficient delivery of
services to suit student needs, the opening up of the provision of services to
a commercial model, and consultation with students to determine what could be
defined as essential services.
Most submissions indicated that the capacity for student
advocacy and democratic student representation had been significantly reduced
since VSU.
Submissions reported that, at a number of universities, there
was no longer a student union. In other instances, a number of student groups
had been merged into one body.
Some institutions commented that there had been benefits from
VSU in terms of student representation and, in particular, that representation
was now from a broader base.[9]
The Australian Labor Party in opposition promised to restore
campus amenities, services and student representation ‘free from Government
dictates and interference’. In the ALP’s white paper on education, shadow
spokesperson, Jenny Macklin, proposed that the provision and funding of
services would be formulated through ‘compact negotiations between the
university and Government’, and that ‘the financial imposition on students will
not increase.’ Additionally as part of the compact negotiations ‘universities
would need to demonstrate that an independent, democratic and securely funded student
representative body exists’.[10]
Following the ALP’s National Conference in May 2007 the
shadow spokesperson Stephen Smith outlined the party’s policy:
I …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.
To a journalist’s question Stephen Smith stated ‘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 … I believe that these
services should be provided either by the Universities, or by the Commonwealth
or both’.[11]
The Bill implements the general thrust of the policy to
restore services and student representation without a return to the
‘pre-Voluntary Student Unionism world’. However the compulsory fee, the
proposed SA-HELP, the lack of government funding and the degree of government
regulation and compliance are major diversions from the government’s policy in
opposition.
Following the government’s consultation on the impact of VSU
the Minister, the Hon Kate Ellis announced that
From 1 July 2009, universities will be allowed to set a
compulsory fee, capped at a maximum of $250 with indexation each year, to help
rebuild student amenities and student services … To help students manage the
fee the Australian Government will provide access to a HECS style loan under
the Higher Education Loan Program (HELP). SA – HELP will allow eligible
students to defer the payment of the fee if they choose.
The Minister ‘stressed that this was not a return to
compulsory student unionism and the provision which prohibits a university from
requiring a student to be a member of a student organisation will remain’. The
Minister also announced a new requirement for universities to ‘meet national
benchmarks relating to access to student support services and fulfil new
representation and advocacy protocols’.[12]
The Bill is not proposing to reintroduce student union fees
in that funds will be administered by higher education providers rather than
student unions. Furthermore providers must not spend the collected funds to
provide support to a political party or to support a candidate for political
office.[13] However the Bill is proposing that a capped student amenities fee can be
charged by a higher education provider and made compulsory. Consequently the
reaction to the Bill is framed within the context of previous debates on
compulsory student union fees. These debates go back to the Whitlam Government’s proposal that the
Commonwealth assume full responsibility for financing higher education. Tuition
fees were to be abolished, but student representative council, union and sports
fees would remain the responsibility of the student, to be collected by the
institution.[14]
Journalist Charles Richardson, a life member of the
Australian Liberal Students’ Federation, has argued ‘VSU arouses political
passions out of all proportion to its intrinsic importance. It is also a
peculiarly fossilised debate, since positions on both sides were set some 30
years ago when university funding arrangements, not to mention the ideological
landscape in general, were very different.[15] Political passions have again arisen in the debate on the old bill with the
Coalition describing the proposed legislation as having ‘the same stench as
Compulsory Student Unionism’.[16] Debate on the old bill was similarly grounded in the ideological arguments of
the previous thirty years. The coalition’s opposition to the old bill was largely
grounded in the belief that the proposed legislation was compulsory student
unionism by another name. Senator Abetz described the services and amenities
fee as compulsory student unionism: ‘It does not matter how you try to dress it
up; it is an infringement on individuals’ rights and liberties, especially the
right to a tertiary education. To be denied the right to a tertiary education
because you do not want to pay a student union fee, now dressed up as an
amenities fee, is abhorrent to every instinct within me’.[17] Coalition senators in their dissenting committee report also argued the fee was
an unnecessary added expense for students. They also expressed concern that the
old bill provided inadequate protection against political activity and
inadequate mechanisms for students to scrutinise expenditure. [18]
Australasian Campus Union Managers’ Association (ACUMA),
Australian University Sport (AUS) and Universities
Australia welcomed the old bill as a means of restoring student services.[19] Universities Australia has called for the government to ‘implement
the policy commitment to a new student services and amenities fee through
successful negotiation of passage of the legislation and speedy implementation
of the policy’.[20]
The Australian Liberal Students’ Federation ran an online
campaign against the old bill and continue to oppose the Bill.[21] Other student groups, including the National Union of Students and the Council
of Australian Postgraduate Associations are concerned over the provisions that
prevent funds going directly to student associations.[22] The NUS told the Senate Committee hearing into the old bill that:
We are disappointed by this legislation. Student
representation has been hit hardest by the introduction of VSU. This new law
will not be good enough to restore the student voice on campus. It has long
been our position that students should decide how their money is spent on
campus and to politically organise to activate those views. They will not have
the ability under the new legislation to do this. In fact, this law may act as
a disincentive to voluntary membership on campus—voluntary membership that
could fund an independent voice.[23]
Their concerns were supported by the Greens who called for
more effective student advocacy in additional comments to the committee report
and during debate on the old bill.[24]
In the lead up to the debate on the old bill the leader of
the National Party in the Senate, Senator Joyce, was reported to be considering
crossing the floor ‘suggesting other Nationals may join him in abandoning the
Liberal Party’s holy grail of voluntary student unionism because it had been a “fiasco”
that had punished country students who enjoyed playing sport’.[25] National Party senators were prepared to support an amended bill. Senators Joyce,
Williams and Nash moved an amendment to allow sporting and recreational facilities
to be covered by an amenities fee but the amendment was defeated.[26] National Party senators did not cross the floor and the old bill was defeated. They
will again be crucial to the passage of the Bill. At a meeting of the Federal
Council of the National Party shortly after the defeat of the old bill the
party agreed to ‘support[s] the introduction of a deferrable, compulsory
tertiary student services fee for the purposes of funding sport and healthcare
at universities, but recommends that discounts or exemptions be considered for
external students’.[27] However the Bill’s provisions will not restrict universities to spending the
amenities fees only on sport and healthcare facilities.
Recognising the importance of
National Party senators to the passage of the Bill, the second reading speech
by the Hon Richard Marles, focuses on the National Party. It commends the party
for their commitment to students from rural and regional areas and calls on the
party to support the bill arguing it is in the best interests of rural and
regional universities and their students.[28]
The Bill does not propose a return to compulsory student
union membership. Therefore the argument that compulsory student union
membership infringes upon the fundamental right to freedom of association in
this respect is irrelevant. However it could be argued that the compulsory fee constitutes a subsidy for services that the
student may not wish to utilise. For example, many part-time and external students
may never use the facilities and services, but still have to pay the annual
charge. Universities Australia argue that ‘not all students may use these
services during their study, but is firmly of the view that it is better for
all students to contribute to the provision of the services, which are then
available to all, than to not have the services available to those who need
them. Additionally, such services will provide a safety net for those students who
had begun their study with no need for the services, but whose situations
change for the worse during the course of their study’.[29]
Professor Jane den Hollander, convenor of Universities
Australia Deputy Vice-Chancellors Committee, describes the proposed SA-HELP as
complex, ‘complicated and confusing for students and annoying and time
consuming for everyone’.[30]
There is some argument for reducing duplication,
administration and cost through incorporating the loan for the $250 amenities
fee into the existing HECS-HELP system. Universities Australia CEO, Glenn
Withers, expressed hope that delay in the passage of the old bill would give
the Government time to reconsider the introduction of the separate SA-HELP.[31] However the provisions remain unchanged in the Bill.
The proposal not to return to a system where student unions
received the bulk of the funds and provided most of the services is cause for
debate. The Newcastle University Students’ Association (NUSA) point out that
‘this legislation does not prohibit universities from funding student
organisations. However, student organisations which are properly performing
their role, including holding universities to account, are unlikely to attract
funding from the university as this represents a conflict of interest’.[32] The Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations (CAPA) argue that ‘student
representation and academic advocacy can only be effective where it is truly
independent, and that it cannot be truly independent where the university has
discretionary control over 100% of student money under this fee.’ [33]
CAPA recommends that the Guidelines should require providers to make a fixed
amount or proportion of the fee directly to student organisations and that
provisions that prevent that should be deleted from the Bill.[34]
Universities Australia welcomes the freedom to contract
services to providers other than student unions as ‘the Unions may not be the
most appropriate providers of these services and amenities envisaged by this
Amendment.’[35]
A 2004 Australian Vice-Chancellors’ Committee survey found
student services and amenities charges ranged from $100 to more than $350. The
median was in the range $200 to $250.[36] The fees raised $172.8 million of which $24.8 million or 14 per cent was
spent on advocacy, representation and political activity.[37] In 2007 there were 664,381 full-time students and 312,405 part-time students at
Australia’s public universities. Assuming universities charge full-time
students $250 and part-time students $125 the fees would raise $205 million.
With the restriction on payments for political activity this should be sufficient
to reinstate a range of services at most universities. Those universities which
charged more than $300 in 2004 may need to provide additional funds from other
sources of income. ACUMA is concerned that the $250 cap will be inadequate ‘if
the government’s intent is that the capped fee also provide for the on-going
capital infrastructure needs (inclusive of deferred maintenance liabilities on
existing buildings and construction/acquisition of new buildings and
grounds/facilities) of the campus services sector’.[38]
An alternative view is put by the University of Queensland
Union which opposes the introduction of the services and amenities fee: ‘VSU
has not resulted in a lessening of campus culture or available services and
activities ... The UQ Union has been able to maintain all essential
representational and advocacy services that were provided before VSU and is
constantly investing in new areas that will encourage further involvement and
awareness of the Union’s services’.[39]
The Bill in new section 19-38 proposes to prohibit student
services and amenities funds supporting political parties or the campaigns of
those seeking political office. Higher education providers will be given
further guidance on the legitimate disbursements of funds in the proposed
Student Services and Amenities Fee Guidelines (the ‘Fee Guidelines’).[40] The proposed Fee Guidelines, released by the Minister on 19 February 2009,
allow support of a range of activities including ‘clubs and societies’.[41] Universities may find they are in conflict with the new legislation if the
activities of such clubs and societies are interpreted as supporting a
political party. As the Australian Liberal Students’ Foundation points out: ‘There
are numerous student organisations that are political in nature that will be
eligible to receive monies compulsorily acquired from students, as the majority
of political groups on campus would not meet these requirements … In fact, the
Australian Liberal Students’ Federation will not be prevented from obtaining
money from a student organisation, as it is not a political party per se’.[42]
This may have been a legitimate
concern if the amendment to introduce SA-HELP had not been introduced. Over a
three year degree a full-time student will pay a maximum $750. Universities
Australia has calculated that this will represent 3.6% of the total HELP debt
of a graduating student with an average HELP debt of $20,579.[43]
The Explanatory Memorandum states
‘the estimated financial impact of SA-HELP over the period 2008–09 is $200.403
million in expenses and -$97.909 million on fiscal balance’.[44]
Schedule 1 amends the Act and deals with the proposed
student services and amenities fee.
Item 4 adds three new subsections to section 19-37 of
the Act. Proposed subsection 19-37(4) allows providers to charge a
compulsory student services and amenities fee. Proposed subsection 19-37(5) defines the student services and amenities fee amount which must be determined
in accordance with the Student Services and Amenities Fee Guidelines (the Fee
Guidelines). The guidelines are made under section 238-10 of the Act and are
disallowable instruments. Proposed Fee Guidelines were released by the Minister
on 19 February 2009.[45]
Proposed paragraph 19-37(5)(e) sets an upper limit of $250
for annual fees from 2010, though this limit is indexed.
The Bill does not change existing subsection 19-37(1) which
prohibits a higher education provider requiring a person to be a member of a
student organisation.
Item 5 proposes a new section 19-38 that
defines the spending of student services and amenities fees. The fees cannot be
used to support, or to pay a person or organisation to support, a political
party or the election of a person to a Commonwealth, State or Territory
legislature; or to a local government body. ‘Political party’ is not defined
under the Bill or existing Act. Proposed subsection 19-38(3) limits the
spending of the student services and amenities fees to purposes specified in
the Student Services and Amenities Fee Guidelines (the ‘Fee Guidelines’).
The Fee Guidelines will be vital if providers are to
successfully comply with the legislation. The proposed Fee Guidelines include
seventeen categories of allowable services and amenities and states:
Allowable uses of the fee in relation to services and
amenities may include the categories listed below. In all cases the purpose
would include but not be limited to, the direct provision of the service or
amenity, the provision of infrastructure (including new construction) and
subsidies that would reduce the price that students may have to pay.
Already Universities Australia and CAPA have identified a
range of services that they consider should be added to the list. Consultation
with higher education providers will be necessary to ensure the final Fee
Guidelines introduced are not in a form that requires numerous amendments.[46]
Item 6 proposes a new section 19-67 requiring
higher education providers that receive funding under the Commonwealth Grants
Scheme to comply, from 2010, with Student Services, Amenities, Representation
and Advocacy Guidelines (the ‘Advocacy Guidelines’). The Advocacy Guidelines will
detail the National Access to Services Benchmarks, and require providers to provide
information on, and access to, non academic student support services. The
Advocacy Guidelines will also include National Student Representation and
Advocacy Protocols to ensure there are opportunities for students to be part of
institutional decision making and have access to advocacy services.[47] The Advocacy Guidelines will be made under section 238-10 of the Act and will
be disallowable instruments. Proposed subsection 19-67(4) states
subsection 19-65(1) does not apply in relation to the Student Services,
Amenities, Representation and Advocacy Guidelines. 19-65(1) of the Act states
‘A higher education provider must comply with the requirements of this Act, the
regulations and the Guidelines made under section 238-10’. The National Union
of Students in its submission to the Senate Inquiry on the old bill expressed
some concern that the Advocacy Guidelines are not legally enforceable: ‘NUS is
somewhat mystified why these Guidelines should be exempted from the compliance
requirement of the Act’.[48] The National Tertiary Education Union (NTEU) also ‘seeks clarification as to
the purpose of clause (4) under proposed Section 19-67, which appears to remove
the Student Services, Amenities, Representation and Advocacy Guidelines from
compliance requirements for higher education providers’.[49] Certainly neither the Second reading Speech nor the Explanatory Memorandum
provide any rationale for the exemption.
Item 10 proposes a new Part 3-5 that
introduces a new Higher Education Loan Program (HELP) category for student
services and amenities fees called Services and Amenities-HELP (SA-HELP).
SA-HELP will allow eligible
students to defer the payment of the student services and amenities fees if
they choose and add it to other income contingent HELP loans taken during their
study.
Concluding
comments
The issue of student amenities fees has historically
generated passionate debate, both in parliaments and in the public domain, much
of it centred on the issue of student unionism and the compulsory payment of
fees to student organisations. The Bill implements a middle path in the policy
debate. It meets a government promise to restore campus amenities, services and
student representation – which have been heavily cut since the Howard
Government enacted the 2005 voluntary student unionism legislation – without
restoring compulsory student unionism. However it does propose a compulsory fee
which will be administered by higher education providers who must in turn
comply with the provisions of the Higher Education Support Act and the
requirements of the Advocacy Guidelines and the Fee Guidelines made under the
Act. The compulsory element of the fee will continue to generate debate of a
philosophical and ideological nature. However Parliament may need to scrutinise
the details in the Bill and the proposed Advocacy Guidelines and Fee Guidelines
to ensure that higher education providers have clarity in their administration
of the student services and amenities fees and compliance with the legislation.
Members, Senators and
Parliamentary staff can obtain further information from the Parliamentary
Library on (02) 6277 2709.
[2]. Higher
Education Support Amendment (VET FEE-HELP and Tertiary Admission Centres) Bill
2009, http://parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/search/display/display.w3p;query=Id%3A%22legislation%2Fbillhome%2Fr4194%22
[3]. It was the
fourth attempt by the Howard Government to abolish compulsory student union
fees: In 1996 the Howard Government introduced the Higher Education Funding
Amendment Bill (No.2) 1996 to repeal provisions providing Commonwealth
assistance to student organisations where State or Territory legislation had
prevented the imposition of student organisation fees. The Bill did not proceed
through the Senate. In 1999 the Higher Education Legislation
Amendment Bill 1999 did not progress through the Senate. In September
2003, the Higher Education Support Amendment (Abolition of Compulsory Up-front
Student Union Fees) Bill 2003 did not proceed beyond the second reading.
[4]. ‘PM steals
victory on uni fees’, The Australian, 10 December 2005, A Fraser,
‘Student unions bill goes through’, Canberra Times, 10 December 2005, D
Wroe, ‘PM has win on student unions’, The Age, 10 December 2005.
[5]. For a list
of the projects and funding committed see: http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/higher_education/programmes_funding/VSUF.htm viewed 13 October 2009.
[6]. For a list
of the projects and funding committed see: http://www.dest.gov.au/sectors/higher_education/programmes_funding/programme_categories/small_business_regional_uni/default.htm
[7]. Australasian
Campus Union Managers’ Association (ACUMA) VSU impact study overview ACUMA
website: http://www.acuma.org.au/resource_library/vsu/index.htm viewed 13 October 2009.
[8]. Peter
McDonald et al, VSU Impact Study: a Study on the Impact of Voluntary Student
Unionism Legislation at Universities across Australia, (First draft
release) Australian University Sport, Milton Qld, November 2007, pp. 1–4, http://www.unisport.com.au/_uploads/res/1_1825.pdf viewed
13 October 2009, and Peter McDonald et al, VSU Impact Study: a Study on the
Impact of Voluntary Student Unionism Legislation at Universities across
Australia, (Second draft release) Australian University Sport, Milton Qld,
February 2008,
pp. 1–4, http://www.unigames.com.au/_uploads/res/1_1893.pdf viewed 13 October 2009.
[9]. Impact
of Voluntary Student Unionism on Services, Amenities and Representation for
Australian University Students – Summary Report, DEEWR, Canberra, July
2008. http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/0BC037DB-1F39-452D-8947-225E63A85DB1/22931/VSUSummaryReport_W2finalfromPublications3.pdf viewed 20 February 2009.
[10]. Australia’s
universities: building our future in the world: a white paper on higher
education, research and innovation, Australian Labor Party, Canberra, 2006,
p. 74, http://parlinfo/parlInfo/download/library/partypol/1LBK6/upload_binary/1lbk65.pdf;fileType=application%2Fpdf#search=%22amenities%20%20student%22 viewed 13 October 2009.
[11]. S Smith
(Shadow Minister for Education and Training), Transcript of Doorstop,
Subject: Voluntary Student Unionism; Mike Bailey, Government
Extravagance, media release, Parliament House, Canberra, 22 May 2007, http://parlinfo/parlInfo/download/media/pressrel/EY4N6/upload_binary/ey4n61.pdf;fileType=application/pdf#search=%222000s%20smith%20hecs%22 viewed 13 October 2009.
[12]. K Ellis (Minister for Youth),
Rebuilding Student Support Services in our Universities, media release, Canberra,
3 November 2008, http://www.deewr.gov.au/Ministers/Ellis/Media/Releases/Pages/Article_081130_112847.aspx viewed 13 October 2009.
[43]. Universities Australia,
Submission to Inquiry into the Higher Education Legislation Amendment (Student
Services and Amenities, and Other Measures) Bill 2009, Universities Australia,
Canberra, February 2009, http://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/documents/publications/policy/submissions/UniAus-Student-Serv-Amen-Sub-Feb-09.pdf viewed 12 October 2009
[45]. K Ellis
(Minister for Youth), Securing the future of university support services, media
release, 19 February 2009; Student Services and Amenities Fee Guidelines http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/2B5C712C-FE76-451E-839F-22F8A377F162/25473/090218StudentServicesandAmenitiesFeeGuidelines.pdf viewed 12 October 2009.
[46]. Universities
Australia, Submission to Inquiry into the Higher Education Legislation
Amendment (Student Services and Amenities, and Other Measures) Bill 2009,
Universities Australia, Canberra, February 2009, http://www.universitiesaustralia.edu.au/documents/publications/policy/submissions/UniAus-Student-Serv-Amen-Sub-Feb-09.pdf viewed 12 October 2009; Council of Australian Postgraduate Associations
(CAPA), Submission to the Senate Inquiry into the Higher Education Legislation
Amendment (Student Services and Amenities, and Other Measures) Bill 2009, CAPA,
Carlton South, February 2009, p. 13, https://senate.aph.gov.au/submissions/comittees/viewdocument.aspx?id=b5f01f65-a2f1-4e0d-ba7b-295f7cb68820 viewed 12 October 2009.
[47]. Student
Services, Amenities, Representation and Advocacy Guidelines http://www.dest.gov.au/NR/rdonlyres/7E49B522-3A12-4581-9D3C-CA3B4561A703/25471/090218StudentServicesAmenitiesRepresentationandAdv.pdf viewed 12 October 2009.
[48]. National
Union of Students (NUS) Submission to the Senate Committee Inquiry into the
Higher Education Legislation Amendment (Student Services and Amenities, and
Other Measures Bill 2009), February 2009, https://senate.aph.gov.au/submissions/comittees/viewdocument.aspx?id=51cada71-42c5-48e5-8c70-caa0cbfdfa99 viewed 12 October 2009.
[49]. The National
Tertiary Education Union (NTEU), Submission to the Senate Committee Inquiry
into the Higher Education Legislation Amendment (Student Services and
Amenities, and Other Measures Bill 2009), NTEU, South Melbourne, 20 February
2009, https://senate.aph.gov.au/submissions/comittees/viewdocument.aspx?id=6130a3a7-09ac-4066-84f5-f2bf106e2d51 viewed 12 October 2009.
Coral Dow
16 October 2009
Bills Digest Service
Parliamentary Library
© Commonwealth of Australia
This work is copyright. Except to the extent of uses permitted by the
Copyright Act 1968, no person may reproduce or transmit any part of this
work by any process without the prior written consent of the Parliamentary
Librarian. This requirement does not apply to members of the Parliament
of Australia acting in the course of their official duties.
This work has been prepared to support the work of the Australian Parliament
using information available at the time of production. The views expressed
do not reflect an official position of the Parliamentary Library, nor
do they constitute professional legal opinion.
Feedback is welcome and may be provided to: web.library@aph.gov.au.
Any concerns or complaints should be directed to the Parliamentary Librarian.
Parliamentary Library staff are available to discuss the contents of publications
with Senators and Members and their staff. To access this service, clients
may contact the author or the Library’s Central Entry Point for
referral.
|
