Bursaries Forum

Lindy Cassidy started the Bursaries forum with a short introductory speech in which she told how students had been campaigning for a 15% cost of living increase, removal of the abatement and a few minor anomolies, only to be greeted with a slap in the face from the Government in the form of a budget promise for next year of $2.

First of the guest speakers was Ken Douglas of the F.O.L. National Executive. He felt that the lack of action on bursaries was linked to the Government's policy of exploiting workers because it made it more difficult for working people to obtain a higher education, keeping it predominantly in the hands of the middle class. Drivers in his union whose children attended university faced many difficulties in keeping them there because of the high costs.

He went on to say that much of the criticism of the Government has been un co-ordinated and although the F.O.L. supported students in their fight, he felt that they could not be successful until they integrated their demands with a campaign for an overall improvment in the living standards of New Zealanders.

Mike Shaskey, the NZUSA Education Vice-President, focused on what students had received in the Budget. After promising to make students hundreds of dollars richer and increase bursaries to meet increased costs, the Government had given only $2 in the Budget along with the removal of some anomolies for technical institute students and postgraduate students overseas. In effect students had lost money through the Government's failure to control prices.

Paul Mather from Polytech said much the same as Glenda McCallum from Teacher's College and Ken Rae from the PPTA. The latter raised a lot of laughter when he reminded students of an election policy for the "full and continuing use of democratic consultation at all levels".

Questions were called for, but none came. Lindy Cassidy then raised some matters from the National Party Conference. Voting on a cost of living indexation to the STB was split down the middle, and it took the Chairman's casting vote to defeat the motion. There was a similar split in voting on removal of the abatement.

One of the speakers felt that students were greedy in not being satisfied with a whole $2, especially when most of them came from well-to-do middle class families. This statement, not surprisingly, got things started. The response was that it was all well and good to say that many came from well off parents but there were not many who were willing to go begging to their parents with their caps in hand.

Another thought that students should not complain about their bursaries since they could always get loans. This was suitably crushed by the statement that it should not be neaessary to sell one's soul for an education.

A popular point of discussion was the direction that the Bursaries campaign should take. There was a general feeling that the public have not been informed enough about the conditions of the STB. Victoria House had spent a whole day in the Cuba Mall distributing leaflets but they felt this needed to be done on a much wider scale.

The main feeling to come out of the forum was that the Government must improve bursaries so that the opportunity for higher education will be freely available for all and not just a select few, but in campaigning for this students must remember to present it in the wider context of improved living standards for all and inform the general public about the issues.