Romany is a member of the International Socialist Organisation of Aotearoa and student representative with Te Tira Ahu Pae, writing here in a personal capacity.
We should all be deeply concerned by Massey University’s announcement that they intend to de-fund Te Tira Ahu Pae, the Massey University student association and take over the running of their services for 2025. This news was delivered to student reps on Friday and promptly leaked to Massive. Later that day Massey announced it in an email to students:
We continue to have ongoing concerns that the representation model/structure is no longer adequately serving the student body. Massey acknowledges Te Tira Ahu Pae as a separate entity, but the university also has a responsibility to ensure the funds that we administer from your student services fee, are used effectively, and governed appropriately. Therefore, we have informed Te Tira Ahu Pae that we are not prepared to enter into an arrangement with them for the funding of representation or services in 2025 at this time.
We will be working with students to support them in creating the representation model for the future, which may be a refinement of Te Tira Ahu Pae, or an entirely different approach. This process will likely commence early in Semester One 2025. In the meantime, we will continue to provide a range of opportunities for students to share their voices and will keep you updated via email.
Two important facts about this situation: first, the Massey students’ association in its current state is a bureaucratic mess, and second, this attempted defunding by the university is a bad development. For at least a year, Massey students would be without an independent student association, and without independence for our student media – Massive magazine and Radio Control. This would leave the student body vulnerable, without collective representation and with threats to the independent media that holds Massey to account. While the university would continue to operate things like clubs and advocacy, the association itself would effectively be dissolved. This is a particularly serious situation considering that Massey is planning big moves over the next few years, from curriculum changes to the sell-off of a large chunk of their property. The de-funding would also be a blow to the paid staff at the association whose future employment is now uncertain.
The announcement of the de-funding has sparked shock, confusion and outrage among many students. On the Sunday following the announcement, the Te Tira Ahu Pae Disability Rep for Distance Students Alhanis Jacobson launched a petition against the de-funding of the students’ association:
This is deeply concerning, as the independence of the association is an essential aspect of providing students conflict-free support and fostering a space for student voices to be freely represented that remains ungoverned by the university. We believe a collaborative transparent approach to fixing any issues is necessary, but student services must remain in the hands of students themselves during the process.
In announcing this defunding, Massey is preempting discussions that were already underway within the association about reforming its broken structures. In a statement on their Instagram Te Tira Ahu Pae acknowledged structural issues that needed to be “resolved” before elections could be carried out. Two days before the de-funding was announced, Te Tira Ahu Pae Board circulated a survey to reps gathering feedback about the association’s structures, and another survey was prepared to circulate with the student body gathering their views on governance and representation structures. Whatever the results of these discussions within Te Tira Ahu Pae might have been, the picture will likely look very different now that Massey has intervened.
Massey is always sensitive about its image, and the controversy of having a dysfunctional student association along with the potential backlash for having staged a de-funding of that association is probably not ideal for the institution. So this scenario is not exactly what the university wants, but this rather extreme step is certainly one way to achieve what Massey does want, which is a student association that acts as a docile service provider and not as an independent student union that is able to cause any trouble for them. If the university is unhappy with the negative coverage that it has repeatedly received from Massive over the past couple of years, this may also provide them with an opportunity to curtail this.
Te Tira Ahu Pae, according to the university, has failed to be this efficient service provider. From the perspective of the student body, it has also failed to be effective as a fighting student union. Acknowledging this, it is important to also acknowledge the ways that the association has been set up to fail. The representation model that is now being criticised as not adequately serving the student body is one that Massey had a hand in creating through the amalgamation process that they forced upon the formerly independent student associations over 2021 – 2023, when they announced that they would only do business with a single association. The amalgamation has effectively curtailed the independence of the students’ associations from each other and from the university, and that has left the newly formed association struggling to find its feet. After the failure of this project, Massey now wants to dissolve the association and exert control over the shaping of what comes next.
Across the country we are seeing a renewed wave of privatisations — from transport, to healthcare, to education. There is an old tactic of the neoliberal privatiser: to create a hostile operating environment for public services, to let them deteriorate from a lack of resourcing, and meanwhile to pump money into private competitors. Once a public service has completely run down the “only option left” is to let the private sector take over. It is easy to see parallels to this process in what is happening at Massey and other universities.
Privatisation and VSM
The story begins, of course, with Voluntary Student Unionism. As astute observers have remarked on seeing what is unfolding at Massey: “if the university can withdraw their funding… how independent was the association in the first place?” The answer is: not very. The Voluntary Student Unionism Bill was introduced by the ACT party and became law in 2011. It was opposed with massive student protests. Prior to this, students were automatically signed up to their student union and paid fees directly to them. VSU removed this requirement, stripping the student unions of most of their funding. Student associations were forced to go to their university for donations, setting up a situation where the associations are reliant on the goodwill of the university to exist. It was a blow to both the independence and the resourcing of student unions. It led to the New Zealand Union of Students Association’s budget being cut by more than half, with member associations withdrawing from the national association citing financial difficulties (as dire as this financial situation is for the general students’ associations, it is worth noting that Māori and Pasifika associations have often gone without funding entirely).
Control of associations’ funding has allowed universities to shape students’ associations into service providers. Funding agreements with the university outline what students’ associations can and can’t do. Based on my experience as a student rep with Te Tira Ahu Pae, much of what we are asked to do, from sizzling sausages to sitting on boards, serves the university’s interest more than the students’. Student organising is supplanted by student “consultation,” with the association essentially providing consultation services to the university to help them gauge student sentiment on various issues, and to allow them to say “we consulted” when making decisions. Not only does this model leave little time for actual student organising, it also leaves associations vulnerable to exactly the scenario that the Massey association is facing, where a university can say that an association is not meeting its requirements and can be defunded. We should be concerned about the precedent which Massey is setting for other universities: the threat of defunding if an association causes too much trouble for a university will now feel much more real.
This is actually not the first time that the university has threatened association funding this year. In a recent Massive article on the dysfunction of the student association’s executive Board, a line is thrown away that says the university had “recommended” a “pause” to the student associations’ membership drive. It would be more accurate to say that the university demanded that the association halt the membership drive on threat of defunding. The context for this membership drive was that the Board had been debating constitutional change that would allow for president roles in the association to be elected. It is not surprising that the prospect of constitutional change provoked debate on the Board. It should be a cause for surprise — and alarm — that the university was able to intervene in these debates, hindering the possibility of constitutional change and democratic reforms with the threat of defunding.
From Federation to Amalgamation
Amalgamation is another important piece of context. As already mentioned, Massey University initiated this process when they decided they would only make a Service Level Agreement for funding with one student association. The various formerly independent associations were compelled into an amalgamation process. While the University claims that this process was student-led, they exerted significant pressure as the ones with all the money and, according to those who were part of this process, actively shaped the outcomes. While this merger saw some marginal benefits in the form of funding for associations that previously were not funded (such as the Pasifika students’ associations) the overall impact was that the autonomy of the formerly independent associations, particularly the Māori associations, was obstructed. The structure of the association made it harder for cohorts to work together, not easier. There is no conspiracy here — the university simply wanted fewer student associations to have to deal with — but if one did want to make sure that student representatives were too busy fighting among themselves to confront the university, this would be a good way to go about it.
The newly amalgamated association came with further drawbacks. Perhaps most egregiously, the amalgamation restructure created a layer of unelected leadership roles. The student representatives on each campus are elected, but there is also an appointed President for each campus and three appointed national President/Manawhakahaere positions. The appointment process is not very transparent, but according to the Te Tira Ahu Pae constitution appointments are carried out by a panel selected by the current Board, which must include the current presidents and association management staff. In other words, those currently in charge choose the next people in charge.
In 2023 Te Tira Ahu Pae struggled to get up and running following amalgamation. The association’s rightly-criticised inability to put up a consistent fight around issues like staff and course cuts is partly due to this, and due to the “service provider” model which is entrenched in the association’s ways of working. This also led to the association being missing in action around opposition to the genocide in Gaza until a mixture of internal and external pressure forced the association to drop the shameful stance of “neutrality” and adopt a principled stance in solidarity with anti-colonial struggles. With a lack of visible activity and lack of recognition among the student body, it is no wonder that student engagement with the association on the whole was very low. I do not say this to disparage my fellow reps, who I know have worked hard in their own areas, but it needs to be acknowledged that the association was not in a thriving state, and that getting things done in this context was an uphill battle.
Meanwhile, since VSU Massey has been slowly encroaching on student association territory, literally and figuratively. Like the other universities, Massey has gradually taken over student association space over the years, reducing whole buildings dedicated to student representation to a few offices and lounges (one of the small victories this year was that the association was able to secure Rainbow rooms on Pukeahu and Ōteha campuses after a long struggle). Massey has also made attempts recently to encroach on the student association’s functions, using the student services fee to create roles such as “Student Voice Champion,” essentially filling some of the functions of a students’ association without the hassle of democratic representation or the threat of student activism.
We Need an Independent Students’ Association
This takeover of the students’ association by Massey needs to be seen in the context of this long trend of encroachment into the realm of student representation, and also in the context of the often overbearing and draconian approach that Massey fosters towards its student body in general.
For all the flaws of the association as it currently exists, this takeover by Massey needs to be opposed. It is exemplary of the power imbalance between students and university management that students don’t have the ability to take over management of the university, no matter how “deeply concerned” we are (and there are plenty of reasons to feel concerned about how management runs the institution and how they treat their staff). Correcting this power imbalance by creating the space for collective action and a collective voice is one of the purposes of a student union. It is necessary because university management does not care about students, not as much as they care about money and about their brand. If students don’t act collectively to advocate for their own interests and the interests of public education, the university will continue to be shaped by the interests of the market. Māori and Pasifika associations have an additional role to fill as well, that of creating a welcoming space for communities that are in a minority within an often alienating university environment. This work, too, benefits from autonomy in how they choose to engage with their cohorts and use their resources. As well as advocating for students on campus, students’ associations could help to make students a force off campus, helping to organize student fightback against climate destruction, the genocide in Gaza and government attacks on Te Tiriti. The association’s attempts to do this over the past few years have been limited, but if it is defunded by the university this activity will likely be snuffed out entirely for at least a year.
Instead of a university takeover, we should push for student-led reform of the association, without more heavy-handed meddling from the university. Students should be able to shape democratic representation that meets our needs, including enhancing independent representation for those groups who seek it, and especially enhancing the rangatiratanga of Māori representation. The associations may choose a united structure, but this should be freely chosen and not under compulsion from the university. We need student representation that is based on active participation, not passive consultation, with democratic decision-making from below and elected and accountable leadership. Students should make it clear that we want associations that are able to hold the university to account, not just quietly provide services. We are unlikely to achieve these aims through another restructure dictated by the university. Voluntary student unionism has seriously curtailed our independence, which means that the university will exert pressure over the association’s workings in any case, but we need to fight for every scrap of independence that we have.
Student activists should respond to these attacks from Massey with a principled stance against the takeover, but we also need to think seriously about the limitations of the student union movement which this situation exposes. It starts with voluntary student unionism, but it doesn’t end there. The service provider model is no longer something that is just imposed from above but something that is baked into association structures, and which is internalised by many of those who go into these associations. Others see student unionism as “student politics,” something to look good on their CV and to perhaps be a stepping stone to a career in “real politics.” The structure of associations encourages student representatives to see the road to change coming from a seat at the table and negotiations with management. Student activists often come to student associations nursing the illusion that they will be able to create real change, and find themselves either sucked into the bureaucracy or chewed up and spat out by it.
If real change in student unionism happens, it will likely be driven by pressure from below. In fact, regardless of what happens to the student association at Massey, Massey students need to be prepared to organise ourselves. A telling illustration from our friends at Vic: the Victoria University of Wellington Students Association (VUWSA) is perhaps the most politically engaged student association at present. They, along with the Māori association Ngāi Tauria, have taken an active lead in Palestine Solidarity organising, which has recently yielded results in the form of the university agreeing to divest from Israeli investments, which it had disclosed as being close to $50,000. In 2023 VUWSA took perhaps the most active role of the students associations in the fight against staff and course cuts. The value of student leadership can be seen here, for sure, but in both cases this was also driven by student activity and protest from below, and would be impossible without it. On other campuses, independent student activism fills the void of political leadership left by student associations. In Otago we can see Otago Students for Justice in Palestine taking action for Palestine despite OUSA’s refusal to take a stand or to back them. Students should defend student unionism, and push for associations to take a stand on issues that are important to us, but we can’t wait around for the associations to take action, we need to take matters into our own hands.
Image Credit: Massey University Students Association Federation
