Salient. Official Newspaper of the Victoria University Students' Association. Vol 41 No. 9. April 24 1978

Research Officer Replies

Research Officer Replies

Dear Simon,

As the person responsible for the production of the NZUSA Handbook (not the content; just putting it together) I'll make a few comments on your NZUSA Handbook article.

Firstly, lets investigate your point that... "The style in which policy is presented has alienated a lot of students."

If you had stated that the style had alienated Some constituent Presidents I could have agreed with you (although, from the comments I have had personally from 6 Presidents, 3 are in favour and 3 opposed). However, to assert that "a lot of students" have been alienated is hardly factual; unless you have information on student response that I don't have (as far as I know you don't).

What we Do have are 3 campus Presidents (Otago, Lincoln, Canterbury) who make that assertion—the Otago President openly admitting that he he promoted his biased view of it as he handed it out to students at a forum. Has he handed it out to other students? We have a Canterbury President who has been overwhelmingly opposed at his own SRC on the question of Canterbury's withdrawal from NZUSA; and we have a Lincoln President who frankly admits that he is only giving his Personal opinion on the Handbook (for my mind, of the three his is probably givng the most accurate representation of his campus' views).

Now, I'm not claiming that most students like the Handbook — all I'm saying is that there's been no accurate assessment, nor any attempt to get one. Your Implication is clearly that the majority of students would not like the Handbook — back that up with facts.

Next point "... There are eight pages of songs which are widely considered a waste of time." Simon, dear, how do you manage to make these gross generalizations; or maybe you have a 'Deep Throat', whose identity you must protext, parcelling our the facts only to you? Again with this point, I could make the same comments about the Presidents v. students. I can also add that the songs were sent to every constituent President 4 Weeks before the production date with a request for comments — none replied save Mr. Guest from Otago whose comment was ""You've got a good wee lot of songs there".

There are undoubtedly many things the Handbook did not do in the way of informing students about NZUSA and what it stands for. I have not seen the Craccum article you refer to, but from your description it points correctly to a couple of improvements that should have been there — but improvements of only a peripheral nature, they wouldn't have altered the supposed antipathy towards the handbook to which you refer. Another things the handbook did not do was to receive contributions of a graphic or written nature from constituents (and others) - or if they were received, they came in at the last possible minute.

I should also point out that the NZUSA handbook was not supposed to detail everything to do with NZUSA. As you would be painfully aware, Simon, a number of other NZUSA publications cover areas of NZUSA activity and policy in much greater detail. It is a pity that no one has brought the constructive criticism that you infer have been made to the National Office or myself, or the President. Perhaps it makes better news if you can surprise us? Mr. Guest certainly thinks so — do you?

Finally, the most important point is that handbooks and other publications, no matter how inn offensive they might be, can never signigicantly affect student views of an organisation like NZUSA. Only activity on behalf of students, that they can see and relate to, and which advances their interests (i.e. Bursaries, SIS and Abortion campaigns) can do that in a positive way. At best, a Handbook can only be an adjunct to such activity.

Dave Macpherson,

NZUSA Research (?) Officer

xs

(David, dear I quite agree with you that constituent presidents do not necessarily represent the views of significant bodies of students every time they speak. That is not the same as saying that they never do this.

I also agree that the majority of activity of NZUSA must lie in positive action, but this is no not to say that Handbooks are not a Significant adjunct to this action. Why else do one at all?

In all your criticisms you consistently ignore the fact that, for whatever reasons, NZUSA is in a crisis. This Must be faced up to as it manifests itself, and not palmed off merely because one does not accept the nature of the criticisms. —Ed.)