Mike Shaskey, Educative Vice President of NZUSA, after spending two years supposedly working on student bursaries, has decided to take up a job in the Education Department. The Education Department is the outfit that presently administers the iniquitous bursaries system. Although [unclear: e] there are certainly precedents for this type of move, students have [unclear: ac] right to expect it not to happen particularly given the current criticism of NZUSA that abound. As a final work on NZUSA Salient takes a look at the style of work required by our National Union.

Last week's National Executive meeting of NZUSA tried to thrash out, yet again, the problems inherent in getting NZUSA across to the inactive 95% of the membership. As indicated, this problem has been tossed around ceaselessly for the last few years. Still no progress has been made it seems.

The reasons for this is that no-one has been prepared to sit down and examine in a systematic way, the manner which the National Officers work in relation to the campuses.

One of the biggest contradictions in NZUSA is definitely that between genuine campus 'activism' and on the other side of the coin, a bureaucratic style of work. It is not enough for student leaders to sit in the office, or visit politicians all day if they expect students to respond to their leadership.

I feel that the National Executive has not touched the central issues in the problem. Sometimes it seems that they don't really want to. But last National Executive some of these did start to emerge such as: do you want a student politician to write submissions or do you want them to organise student activities or protests?

Conservatism or inactivity?

The so-called conservative backlash against NZUSA has been because of the lack of campus based action, rather than a sudden right wing upsurge. If the situation slips any further then NZUSA could find itself having more of its members walking out, or kicking up a fuss.

The main danger that NZUSA National Officers can fall into is 'bureaucratism'. Here I feel bound to make the negative example of one of the NZUSA National Officers, Mike Shaskey.

Education is the most important task of NZUSA—the constant pressuring for more adequate system. Yet campuses have had very little leadership from the Education Vice President. To try to give a lead to education work in campus, Mike Shaskey set up the National Education Action Committee. Despite the statement the EVP put in his report to August Council, "The NEAC is now, I believe, functioning in an orderly and productive manner", the truth of the matter is, according to VUWSA Education Officer Rob Moore-Jones and President Lindy Cassidy, that it is a complete waste of time.

Bursary inaction

This year's bursaries demonstrations were a case in point. If the NEAC worked so well why did they not decide to tackle the bursary question earlier in the year. When the campaign was started, there was considerable confusion over who was marching and when The publicity was, according to the VUWSA Forum on NZUSA, ill directed and released too late. In fact, it seems that the NEAC played little or no part in the bursaries campaign at all.

The only campuses which could claim to have had successful activities were either those which had Education Officers who did extra work on their own or those which had the assistance of NZUSA Officers right there in organising their campaigns as did Massey. Theirs was the best demonstration of all.

Instead of working with students on the campuses, Mike preferred the politiking style—visiting Ministers and Education officials, While it is necessary to carry out negotiations with Education Officials, Campus involvement and support must not be sacrificed because of it, and on bursaries, this has definitely happened.

In separating the campus involvement with the negotiating side, the position becomes merely one of an advocate. It therefore came as no surprise when we heard that Mike Shaskey has decided to accept a job from The Department of Education when he leaves the service of NZUSA. It seems that the high regard the Department has of Mike has earned him a job with the help of NZUSA. This will also place NZUSA in an invidious position when they go to the bursaries conference to discuss the Department's paper on Tertiary Education Financing (i.e. student loans). Mike Shaskey will lead NZUSA's delegation.

Advocate or organiser?

Nevertheless, the main point of all this is that an officer of the association has conducted his work in such a way as to lose touch with what students are feeling. It is the Department of Education which is forcing these intolerable conditions onto students and compromising them further with scurrilous documents like this one. It seems strange that Mike Shaskey would want to accept a job there.

Students don't just expect their elected representatives to do a 'job'. They want them to push the policy of the association and, in doing so, involve students in their own struggle. This is the only way that the student movement will be built up and mobilised—and that, after all, is the job of NZUSA.

National Executive must take a long hard look at the bad effects of bureaucratism with in themselves and within the National Office which they elect.

True, students need leadership from the top. But what use is this leadership if the members are not right behind? How are the leaders able to keep in touch if they are not on the campuses organising with the local officials.

It is hoped that next year's National Office will take heed of these past events and guard against the dangers present. We sperately need a strong National Union How more than ever. If we have to be ruthless to our elected officials to get one then it must be done.

It's lonely at the top—but there's a way to fix that.

—David Murray.