Page 1885 - Week 07 - Wednesday, 16 June 1993
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
students, such as the gym, attending concerts, or even the various clubs that exist on a campus, simply do not have the appeal to these part-time or mature age students, who, quite reasonably, if they have any spare time from their studies, would prefer to spend it with their spouse and their families.
We believe that it is unfair, therefore, that they should be compelled to fund these activities, for example, to amounts of $107 twice a year at the University of Canberra or $120 a year, at $30 per term, at the Canberra Institute of Technology. I stress the word "compelled", because it may be that even some of these part-time or mature age students will be willing to pay the fees. If so, nobody stops them doing so under this legislation, providing it is their option. Similarly, some full-time students might not wish to pay union fees. They might not have any interest in the facilities that can be provided through these fees. Again, I stress that it is their right not to do so, and thus forgo the services and the facilities that the fees provide. Quite simply, the legislation removes the compulsion to join a student association at tertiary institutions in the ACT under the control of the ACT Government.
Apart from being Liberal Party policy, this legislation parallels a recent amendment to the Discrimination Act moved by Mr Moore to make unionism in the ACT non-compulsory. In defence of my own legislation to change the compulsion to voluntary membership of a student body, I cite the same reasons as advanced in support of the previous successful amendment, namely, if trade unionism is to be voluntary for reasons of freedom of choice, of social justice, of democratic principles - all arguments which were put forward in favour of the previous amendment - the same arguments must be advanced in support of the legislation I present today to make membership of student unions voluntary. I commend the legislation to the house.
Debate (on motion by Mr Wood) adjourned.
DOG CONTROL (AMENDMENT) BILL (NO. 2) 1993
MR WESTENDE (11.01): Madam Speaker, I present the Dog Control (Amendment) Bill (No. 2) 1993.
Title read by Clerk.
MR WESTENDE: Madam Speaker, I move:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
Madam Speaker, in introducing this Bill I would like to reiterate that it has been the Opposition's intention to approach the matter of amending the Dog Control Act in a bipartisan manner. I have indicated this intention on previous occasions, including at the time of Ms Szuty's Bill. Madam Speaker, I have consulted with the Minister and his department. I have waited for the working party on dog control to make its assessment, and I have in fact read its draft report. A draft of this Bill was circulated to the working party members for their comment, and I have taken note of those comments that I have received.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .