VSU - does the term sound vaguely familiar? Did you hear it mentioned on tv some time last year, or on talk back radio? Maybe it was John Lawes bitching about those rowdy bougoisie young student polis with the silver spoons in their mouths? Or Brendan Nelson complaining that he couldn't do his job because of the "hard core" student protesters? So just what were those bloody hippies protesting over? Now you're at uni, it's time to find out... MEGAN CLEMENT* explains the mystery of VSU and what everyone was getting so gosh darned upset about.

VSU stands for Voluntary Student Unionism. A more accurate accronym is ASOL, or Anti-Student Organisation Legislation. Oddly enough, that's not a term you would have heard much in the press - those who initiated the legislation don't like it, it sounds a lot harsher than VSU. I mean, what's wrong with voluntary unionism? Aren't unions meant to be voluntary? Well, yes. And that's where things gets confusing. Because for a long time, ending in second semester this year, it has been compulsory to be a part of the student organisation at whichever publicly funded university you attend. This is known as Universal Student Unionism. You see, student unions aren't like trade unions, in a few important ways. A student union is a type of organisation called a public organisation (as opposed to trade unions or political parties which are private). Political activities form a small part of what the student organisations as a whole contribute to the university, through the Students' Association, of which it is not compulsory to be a member, but which provides important services such as student rights advocacy and funding to the many wonderful clubs and societies. The politics of the students association can and frequently are changed by students themselves through the voting proceedures. The student union's main purpose is to provide services and support to students of the university, and as such this public organisation is actually not much like a traditional union at all;  it's actually a lot more accurate to compare it to a professional association of which it is compulsory to be a member (like the AMA).

Conservative politicians usually use freedom of association arguments when defending ASOL. The ‘freedom of association’ (or more accurately freedom of dissociation) debate is really a distortion of the truth. Although the Liberals love to exhort student unions to get out of the dinosaur ages, already the vast majority of campuses - including Newcastle - have some form of opt–out of membership provision. What was at stake over VSU wasn't compulsory membership but a separate question of whether students should be required make a financial contribution to the cost of providing non-academic services at universities (some of which is passed onto student-controlled organisations). But the 'freedom of association' argument was frequently exploited by the government, for example "This is the 21st Century. Union membership should be voluntary and services should not be propped up by the compulsory appropriation of students’ hard earned money". Clearly there is an issue of misrepresentation here; whilst in a trade union, compulsory membership would probably mean forced political rallies and meetings, but in the wonderful world of uni, it means paying your share for the services you benefit from. While it may be, frankly, bloody annoying to fork out a fairly large chunk of change at the beginning of semester, when you already have books, HECS, and lovely Christmas or holiday debts to deal with, it's important to put this in perspective.

Apart from Australia and New Zealand, every major university in the developed world has compulsory fees, separate to the cost of tuition, and usually much higher than those typically paid in Australia, which contribute to the services you receive at university. Yes, that means Harvard and Oxford and any other big name you can think of. Fees are generally far higher than they are here. And all these universities make it compulsory to be a member of their various organisations. In fact it is only Australia and New Zealand where this is even considered remotely debateable. The vibrant campus lifestyles made possible by the organisations are considered essential to the university experience. In fact, the Peoples Republic of China, one of the least democratic nations in the world, is one of the only other nations which regard its student organisations with such distaste.

If all this wasn't enough, maybe we should have a look at the case of Western Australia, which had VSU from 1997-2002 in very similar form to the impending nation-wide legislation from. WA's Liberal Government introduced 'full blown VSU' - totally voluntary membership and payment of fees to student organisations, with no replacement fee for services or amenities. At the risk of sounding melodramatic and subjective, the results were, well... pretty bad. The Universities themselves took on the cost of much of the administration after the student associations no longer could, the result being less funding for research and teaching. This summary of results at Edith Cowan is fairly typical of WA's four universities:

• Academic Rights Support - lost at undergraduate level
• Welfare Officers - retained only through university funding position directly
• Guild Service Centres - lost
• Full Programme of Cultural Events - lost
• Women’s Rooms - lost
• Weekly Campus Newsletter - lost
• Policy support for student reps - lost
• Women’s Department - lost
• Environment Department - lost
• Orientation Camp for First Years - lost
• Funding for Clubs and Societies - reduced
• Student Emergency Loans - lost
• Sexuality Department - lost
• Subsidised Catering on Campus - lost
• Personal Accident Insurance - Lost
• Off Campus Housing Advice - Lost
• Student Conference Funding - lost
• Student Publications - reduced
• International Student Campaigns and Projects - reduced
• Activities -reduced
• Postgraduate Support - reduced
• Regional Campus Funding -reduced
• Affiliation Fees to NUS - unable to pay
• Affiliation Fees to Sports Peak Body - unable to pay.

To me, the easiest way to think of the whole deal is this: everyone pays local taxes to the council of the community they live in, right? And in return they get (alright, sometimes dodgy!) services and community facilities. Ditto for the uni. As Peter Costello once said while defending student associations in his days as a Monash student politician, “the fact that some people object to the way in which some public funds are spent does not mean that they are therefore exempted from paying taxes.” Man, I wish my taxes didn't go to John Howard's retirement fund. I wish he had to stay in some old folks village with grumpy underpaid nurses, strange smells and a whole lot of plastic plants, just like everyone else's grandpa. But we all know that just ain't gonna be the case.

For more info, go to any of the websites listed below.

In the first edition of OPUS: 'Howard's Values - The Grinch That Stole Sex, Drugs and Rock n Roll from Uni (and yeah, quality education too)'.

*declaration of bias - as education officer for nusa this year and someone who watched and participated closely in the fight, yeah, I am damned biased. but hell, so is everyone else you'll read or hear on the topic and at least I'm honest.