page 20

The Facts about Canterbury

I was not impressed with your editorial "Can-terbuury in Again, Again." I acknowledge that an editorial is an expression of opinion, but in all fairness shouldn't the readers be given some access to the 'facts' upon which this opinion wa formed. How many articles about Canty's withdrawal movements have been published in Salient. More to the point, how many Cantas have been distributed around campus, giving an alternative opinion.

I found the editorial somewhat misleading, 800 to 500 votes isn't, to my mind a particularly convincing loss. Not when those votes are only 1300 of a possible 7000 votes, and the majority was 61% of votes. It would only take 150 voters to change their minds for that motion of withdrawal to have been passed.

I would like to dispute the statement that the anti-NZUSA movement is not "ground-swell" ie the feelings of the vast majority. Even the above figures suggest that any such ground swell is at least that of a very substantial minority. I attedded last years attempt to get out of NZUSA at Canterbury - the vast majority of students present were against NZUSA - the motion was only defeated after twenty minutes of spectuacular oratory by the president of Otago. He promised to personally stand over NZUSA to make sure they towed the line. (Of course he resigned a little later to a comfy job).

The feeling amongst the students I was in contact with, in my various classes, who form part of the apathetic majority was definitely anti ALL student politics. A feeling demonstrated by the multitude of darts and calls when any student politician attempted to canvas support in lectures.

Mr Beach states that one of the reasons "why we don't need NZUSA" is because it does not deal with matters "concerning" students. How right he is - any student population is a diverse body with liberals, radicals, conservatives, apa-thetics, and everything rise. There is no way a student politician (elected by a very small body of students) can issue a statement that accurately reflects the majority, let alone all, student opinion (and by majority opinion, I mean majority of university students, not just the majority of "politically aware" students!)

He sums up anti—NZUSA feeling as generated because "few students seem to understand what their national association is and what it does." And whose fault is that?

And just in passing, "the liaison between national officers based in Wellington and Govt..... officials is built around a personal contact basis is cited as a reason for retaining NZUSA. But other than breaking the bad news first on bursarys etc., (courtesy the tea lady?) it has yet to have yielded any positive results — finding out that our bursarys Should be raised $9.00 doesn't make the bitter pill of reality any better!

Just remember Mr Beach, that in democracies it is appreciated if more than one opinion can be given!