NZ First – Curwen Rolinson

NZ First Youth believes the actual issue people want to see action on is worrying levels of public intoxication across all levels, and feel that a simple increase in the age of purchase will do little to crack down on, say, 24 year old binge drinkers. We would like to see the return to the statute-books of a Drunk & Disorderly offence, and believe the public punitive examples made of dangerous intoxication will be instrumental in affecting the much-debated culture change. On the other hand, if the age for on-licenses does go up, we expect that the quality of live gigs and entertainment will increase to at least pre-1998 levels.

ACT On Campus – Michael Warren

Happiness too lamestream anyway

A Victoria PhD student has confirmed that the reason hipsters are miserable is because they are hipsters.

PhD researcher Dr Erica Chadwick found that the way people act when they’re happy has an effect on their overall mental wellbeing.

The three-year study, which looked at just under 2000 New Zealanders, found that people have different strategies for how they manage minor everyday positive events that make up life.

These varied from actively boosting feelings through physical actions, such as celebratory jumping or self congratulatory high-fives, to more subtle strategies such as ‘living in the moment’ and ‘savouring a meal’.

So what impact does this have on hipsters?

Chardwick found that dampening or “keeping things low key” had a negative effect on mental wellbeing. So that sad look a hipster casts from behind their decaf short black, well, it’s not doing them any good.

Chadwick also found that young people realising that a happy moment would one day make a fond memory to enjoy in the future (so they remember it) was beneficial to their overall mental health.

Salient is uncertain whether it would be beneficial to our mental well-being to make a point of remembering our weekend. Even if we could remember it.

The message to hipsters: put some socks on, roll up your trousers, smack a smile on and give yourself a high-five.

NZ First – Curwen Rolinson

Point number one is that we need to ensure the industry remains Kiwi owned. We also need to make the punishments for environmental violations more severe and actually enforce them. We need to engage Federated Farmers, and we must stop being complacent about the role of our dairy industry in ongoing waterway degradation.

ACT On Campus – Michael Warren

Proper enforcement of current regulation is all that is needed to make the dairy industry more sustainable. Politicians, lobbyists and environmentalists must understand that every new regulation is an extra cost on business, which inevitably affects New Zealand’s economic performance. The only way to increase our wages is if we increase our productivity, and that will not happen if the regulatory burden on business keeps growing.

Vic labour – Reed Flemming

Much needs to be done to make dairying, an important export sector, sustainable in New Zealand. This includes using water carefully for irrigation, treating effluent to protect rivers, having strict fertilising standards to safeguard groundwater and a comprehensive Emissions Trading Scheme including agriculture. To grow our economy and be a sustainable country we have to look at alternative exports, specifically in the high-tech sector to make a smarter, richer, greener New Zealand.

Greens@Vic – Harriet Farquar

Dairy farming is vital to New Zealand. It is imperative therefore, so as to future-proof our economy, bthat we protect our ‘clean green’ brand. Under the Government’s current plan, which further delays the introduction of agriculture into the ETS, the taxpayers are subsidising the pollution. We need a fair ETS, which puts in place the right economic incentives to encourage the industry to adopt sustainable practices, and maximise the long-term resilience of our economy.

Vicnats – Haley Mortimer

Agriculture is an ingrained part of New Zealand society; the ‘backbone’ to the economy, earning more than 40% of total export income. Environmental sustainability within the industry will come from the control of nutrient run-off; utilising pre existing legal bodies for water quality standards. Achieved through sector education and acknowledgment of the value of the natural capital and the wealth sustaining ability it holds.

This University’s response to the VSM legislation is a discredit to the institution. Be alert and alarmed.

The University “middle management” is set on a path of systematically undermining VUWSA, a democratic student-led organisation, while imposing their own bureaucratic tragedy of a “consultative body” onto an unsuspecting student population. Sadly, it’s not at all clear whether they are doing this on purpose.

Victoria has decided that because VUWSA is no longer a universal association, they are going to set-up their own “consultative” body—the “Student Forum”. Again we will be compelled to be represented but this time by an organisation we haven’t mandated and we have no right to opt-out of. University bureaucrats have decided the membership of this body (class representatives and faculty delegates largely) and its brazenly toothless accountabilities to the student body.

The irony of setting up an organisation that no one has consented to because VUWSA (an association that 70 per cent of students have joined) is supposedly not representative enough is lost somewhere. The proposal that students should decide upon their representative structure in a referendum was proposed by VUWSA in 2010 and has been ignored.

Universities around the world have students’ associations, governments or unions. They are democratically controlled organisations, organised and designed by students. They have proven themselves to be a powerful force in improving decision-making, academic success and the development of leadership. They reinforce the concept of the university—as a critic and conscience of society—a place for discussion and dissent. They are a part of the university identity and help define its experience for many students.

A university has lost its way when it tries to impose a system of representation onto the student body. This is the sign of a university that does not trust its students and is determined to control dissent. It is part of a wider picture. The management of Victoria has been hostile to dissent from staff for years and now they sense an opportunity to turn their control fixation against students.

Good universities should value student leadership and trust that students can organise themselves. They need not be concerned with controlling this process. When they do, their designs are likely to fundamentally flawed. The Student Forum does not represent a system that would be designed by students, for students. It is out of touch.

The underlying proposition of the VSM legislation, for better or worse, was that students’ associations should continue strongly but that their influence would be dependent on their ability to attract members and represent students well. That the “Student Forum” would be the result of that legislation is bitterly ironic. The Forum creates the fiction of universality and we are compelled to be represented by it; yet sadly it is likely to be entirely detached from the wider student body.

If we must have the Student Forum then so be it—it could have a role to play. However, the wider part of the story is the undermining of VUWSA. Most associations internationally cannot levy students directly—they rely on “block grants” (common in the UK) or contracts for services from a university. VUWSA requires funding from VUW in order to continue to provide the services that are properly provided by the student body (orientation, clubs, advocacy, certain support services etc.)

Victoria has expressed its commitment to VUWSA and student-led services, but the actions of middle-management do not match this rhetoric. Starting with the Orientation fiasco it seems the University is intent on hacking VUWSA up, piece by piece. Contracts for services will be available, but on an ad hoc basis and with no long-term assurances. There does not appear to be recognition that it is valuable to have students serving students as part of a community. Instead, there is danger that we will see students relinquishing control of these services to middle management. Again, sadly, this seems to be all about control.

There is hope. The issues discussed here are not an official policy of the University; they may not be entirely intentional. This has all happened quickly and there might be an opportunity to take a step back and revaluate. The university can still and should recognise the importance of having an independent democratic student-led representative organisation and student-led services. VUWSA is currently the body for that job and it should be nurtured as part of a vibrant and positive university identity.

The author of this article has chosen to remain anonymous. They are not a member of the VUWSA Execuctive.

GRADUATES: living under the loan 

Increasing the repayment threshold from 10 to 12 per cent, kicking in after a loan holder earns over $19,084. Tertiary Education Minister Steven Joyce said “changing the repayment amount will not only encourage students to pay back their loans faster, but will allow the Government to invest money back into the tertiary sector.”

Comparatively, the Australian scheme is more progressive—with minimum repayments of only 4 per cent of income over $48,000, rising to 8 per cent with income levels.

Issues have been raised about how this will disproportionally affect some gradates. Green Party student spokeswoman Holly Walker said young families would be most hurt by the Government’s attempt to balance its books.

“About 40 per cent of couples with children aged between 18 and 24 have student loan debt and about 30 per cent of those aged 25 to 34 are also paying off student loans,” Walker said.

Child Poverty Action Group said the changes would hit young struggling
young families.

Spokeswoman Susan St John said the threshold for repayment was already far too low, at an annual income of $19,080, and the 10 per cent repayment rate on income above that threshold is far too high.

New Zealand University Students’ Association president Pete Hodkinson said the issue didn’t lie with the amount of the increase, it is at what point it comes into effect.

“We have a system where the repayment threshold is at $19,084, which is below the poverty line for a lot of students,” he said.

“It’s not the students earning between $40,000 and $80,000 a year we are worried about, it’s the students that are between $19,000 and $30,000 for who that is a significant issue.”

Labour’s Tertiary Education spokesperson Grant Robertson said it could further the New Zealand’s brain drain problem.

“You’re sending a message to graduates— we want more cast members for the GC —because that’s gong to be the impact
of this, sending people off to Australia,” he said.

STUDENTS: building the debt-palace

Changes to student allowances will further restrict those who can qualify for student allowances, and will see students taking on personal debt as the Government tries to cut down on its own borrowing levels.

Up to 5000 students will be affected, with a 4-year freeze on the parental income threshold and a stop to allowances after 200 weeks or 4-years of study.

Previously there had been concessions for students in certain long-term degrees or postgraduate courses, to apply for student allowance, but these have been scrapped.

VUWSA President Bridie Hood said the proposed changes don’t do anything to help students under pressure as they try to support themselves through university as many of them continue to struggle to make ends meet.

“Even with the support that is currently available to them, sixty per cent of students have to work while they study, and as figures released last month show that fifteen per cent of students are living in absolute poverty, unable to afford basic necessities such as food, clothing, and accommodation.”

NZ First – Curwen Rolinson

NZ First is committed to the idea of equal pay for equal work; as we demonstrated when we voted to abolish youth rates. The same principles apply here. We need to recognize that both a gender wage gap and a gender employment gap exist in our job market. We need to fight sexist stereotypes and double standards with education and legal protection, and explore solutions from successful overseas models. This must include an enhancement of paid parental leave, and a greater presence and role for unions in the workplace in fighting wage discrimination.

ACT On Campus – Michael Warren

he ACT Party has no official policy on the gender wage-gap. However, we welcome any suggestons to help close it.

Vic Labour – Lydia McKinnon

New Zealand’s gender wage gap is inexcusable. In practical terms, a woman earns about 90 cents for every dollar a man does. Labour is committed to tackling this issue by reinstating the Pay Equity Unit scrapped by National, restoring the Training Incentive Allowance which was cut by National and reinstating the goal that 50 per cent of the positions on state sector boards will be held by women. These measures are vital if New Zealand wants to be a truly equal society.

Greens@Vic – Harriet Farquhar

New Zealand adopted the Equal Pay Equity Act in 1972, and yet on average women still earn 12 per cent less than men per hour. Green MP Jan Logie’s Equal Pay Amendment Bill however, provides a way to effectively address this issue. Currently it is very difficult to check employers are complying with the law, this Bill therefore would make information about gender pay in their workplace available to workers, and publicly publish nation-wide gender pay data.

Vic Nats – Christian Hermansen

National believes that, in a fair and just society, all wages and working conditions should be fair and equal. Regardless of the individuals gender, race or religion.

• ☛  In a fit of vitriol, President Obama seizes on the one year anniversary of the death
  of American Enemy Number One Osama Bin Laden to question the leadership qualities of Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney in a series of television advertisements. Seeming to forget Bush’s eight year reign of patriotic terror, Republicans cry out over the abominable politicisation of a day of American victory.

  ☛  It seems this month Bin-Laden gossip is in vogue, as the US Military releases a trove of Bin-Laden’s documents captured in the covert operation that culminated in his death. Documents reveal that Osama thought assassinating Biden wasn’t worth the hassle.

• ☛  Government officials prevent blind Chinese dissident Chen Guangeng from meeting with US diplomats. The Chinese government promises to keep him safe though–by installing CCTV cameras throughout his house, threatening his family and restricting his freedom of movement.

  ☛  Despite wanting only to celebrate the annual marijuana ‘4:20’ festival, San Diego college student, Daniel Chong, is instead obtained by federal agents, detained unlawfully, left in a cell without food and water with nothing but a small amount of meth, forgotten for five days and forced eventually to drink his own urine. In the land of the free, the price of getting high is, it seems, high.

  ☛  Invercargill is ravaged by a spate of tree-related vandalism, culminating in the wanton destruction of 10 saplings. Notoriously pro-vegetation city Councillor Neil Boniface resolves to create “positive outlets” for Invercargill’s foliage-hating youth, such that they no longer “feel the need to destroy things.”