The return of compulsory, unbundled, student amenities charges?

A report in this morning’s SMH says that the Rudd government will next month announce the return of student amenities charges. It’s a bad sign for the broader Bradley review of higher education policy, because it suggests that the government is making the same mistake as its predecessor: creating messy and bureaucratic ad hoc schemes to deal with ostensibly isolated issues, rather than tackling the price control and quota issues that are at the main causes of dysfunction in the higher education sector.

According to today’s report, the new model will be:

“opt-out” system in which students will be able to choose which services their fees are spent on and whether they belong to the student union.

So it sounds like students will have to pay some money, but get some choice in what that money is spent on.

This is an unsatisfactory solution for all parties. It prevents universities offering just the degree and nothing but the degree, a sensible option for those without the time or inclination to participate in campus life. It prevents universities from charging everyone for the same bundle of services, so that as part of their marketing they can promise free access to X, Y or Z facility or service.

The solution, as I have argued for years, is to just let a market operate. Some universities will offer a high level of services, some low, and students can choose between them. Most are likely to offer optional extras. None needs bureaucrats in Canberra second-guessing how they should run their universities.

Update: Government Ministers cast doubt on the compulsory element of this story.

4 thoughts on “The return of compulsory, unbundled, student amenities charges?

  1. “None need [sic] bureaucrats in Canberra second-guessing how they should run their universities.”

    He who pays the piper calls the tune.


  2. Spiros – Grammar corrected, but I disagree with the substance of the comment. The government contributes nothing towards non-academic services, and should have no say in the matter.


  3. I agree but governments like to meddle. It’s what they do. And in this instance we have an education minister who was president of AUS. Of course she is going to be prescriptive. Any education minister who cut their teeth in student politics would do the same. Who could resist the chance to settle old scores and reminisce about the great days when they were young and foolish and put the world to rights?


  4. So according to you spiros all us ex-students are living vicariously through our great (ed.) leader’s dreams of when she was younger and a member of the communist party…. on no wait she only did typing for them… Lol.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s