The President Replies

At the risk of continuing an already drawn out debate, I wish to reply to the letter written by Curunathan K. and 39 others. The letter asks 4 questions.

1. What has happened to the continued struggle to win equal rights for overseas students?

At NZUSA's May Council, it was decided to give the National Overseas Student Action Committee (NOSAC) more political responsibility and greater financial resources to help wage the campaign to win equal rights for overseas students. The legal battle which cost over $3,000.00 of students' money has been discontinued because it has been established that legally the ultimate decision is left in the hands of the Minister of Immigration. However, the political struggle is still being continued by NOSAC and other officers of NZUSA who lobby Members of Parliament, distribute relevant material and prepare detailed submissions to Government policy-making bodies.

2. What has happened to the campaign to get James Movick back to his elected position of International Vice-President of NZUSA?

To clarify the position, I must point out that James officially resigned from his position as International Vice President before he left the country. Though Guru and some of his friends may wish to use James as a pawn for their own political ends, it is his decision whether he wishes to return to New Zealand and, when he left, he was undecided. It is not a question of us telling James what to do, but rather it is up to us to fight for the right for overseas students to take up positions in NZUSA.

3. Could you please give us an outline as to how this battle is being continued, what headway has been made and whether the abrogation of the elected position of James Movick could have in any way an adverse affect on the appeals to get Movick back to New Zealand?

Basically this question has been answered. However, it is important to note that an association without the active participation of its membership can wage as many campaigns as they like but if they do not have the active support and ideas of their membership then the campaigns have little impact. At SRCs, VUWSA's most important policy-making body, there have been no motions by overseas students, regarding the continuation of the fight for equal rights. The original campaign itself achieved a limited amount of support from overseas students and received none from Gurunathan K. In fact, James expressed some disappointment in the lack of support from people such as Curunathan K., whom he had considered friends.

4. Could Lindy Cassidy inform us of the position she and other members of the VUWSA delegation to the May Council took as regards the NZUSA position of International Vice President?

It is a pity that the signatories to the letter did not attend the last two SRCs where this question was debated at great length. The decision regarding the retention or otherwise of the International Vice President (IVP) was decided within the caucus democratically, and with much debate.

The Victoria delegation decided to vote for the removal of the position of IVP for a number of political and financial reasons. Politically, NZUSA was in a state of crisis. There were 3 notices of withdrawal, from Massey, Canterbury and Lincoln, hanging over Council. It was essential that NZUSA presented a strong unified stand to combat these attacks. It was felt by the majority of the campuses that there had been a marked shift in recent years away from mass campaigns on International issues to campaigns on education and the national situation. It was also felt that the structure and in particular the position of International Vice President did not reflect this. Some campuses expressed the desire to scrap all international policy and international campaigns. However, all campuses felt that special emphasis should be given to the needs and problems of overseas students.

Faced with this situation the Victoria delegation compromised by agreeing to the removal of the IVP But at the same time stipulating that the President be directly responsible for Overseas Students, that the General Vice President has responsibility for International Campaigns, and that NOSAC be given greater financial and political responsibility.

Financially, NZUSA was also in trouble. Either one position had to be out or all the campaigns would have had money taken from them. This would have further weakened NZ USA as an effective political body. However, NOSAC did receive a substantial financial increase whereas every other area received a cut in expenditure.

In my last letter, I asked those overseas students, particularly Guru, to openly and directly challenge the actions of VUWSA or NZUSA either privately to me, or publicly at an SRC.

However, instead of an open debate, a vicious rumouring campaign initiated by Guru, has ensued. Personally I deplore these tactics. Only those who are afraid of the truth run from open debate.