This year, the Socialist Alternative (SAlt) aligned ticket Left Action returns and sets forward its most pressing priority as, “Free Palestine.” The ticket, which runs on a policy platform of mobilising and promoting left-wing activism on campus, sets itself in clear opposition to tickets such as “Progress for ANUSA”, and to a lesser extent, “Change for ANUSA”.  

At its core, the ticket envisions ANUSA as an activist union, which places a bulk of its resources into building national campaigns on Palestine, cost of living and social justice. In the Woroni x Observer debate last Friday, Presidential candidate Nick Reich stated, “I… propose no changes to any of the service provision ANUSA currently provides,” and thus the ticket refrains from putting forward service-based policies of its own. 

If the 110 days of the ANU Gaza Solidarity Encampment, the mass mobilisation to defend the camp when police action was threatened, and subsequent efforts which has led to ANU’s stated intention to divest from “controversial weapons” has revealed anything, it’s that there is an appetite for student activism. 

But as University students continue to bear the brunt of a cost of living crisis, and face cuts to their degrees, will Left Action’s policies be enough? 

“Free Palestine”  

The ticket’s approach to Palestine advocacy is primarily two-fold. Firstly, it promises to, “force ANU to disclose and divest all investments and research ties with companies that profit from the genocide.” Secondly, it rejects the ANUSA governance review. 

Earlier in the year, members of the ticket rejected the Socially Responsible Policy (SRI) consultations, where Reich himself said in a press release, “The SRI consultation process is a clear attempt by the ANU to rehabilitate its public image without addressing any of the major demands raised by student protestors. It is not only too late but far too little.” 

The group instead campaigned for a Special General Meeting (SGM) and did so successfully. Around 200 students came to the meeting, with a clear majority in support of the two pro-Palestine motions although it was the SRI policy consultations through which the ANU announced its plans to divest from “controversial weapons manufacturers.” 

When asked whether the ticket would consider consultations with the ANU to secure further divestment, Reich responded, “we’re more than happy to meet with the university, but it’s not always this dichotomy of meet or don’t meet.” 

“We are… willing to engage with the university, sit down, have meetings, make arguments, but we don’t expect that to be the difference. We think that the main thing is putting real pressure on them through publicity, protest, activism.” 

He states, “The SRI policy review was a manoeuvre by the university to fob off the protests, basically to ignore the actual full demands and to railroad it into something which was always more limited. And so I think that what we could fully expect from the SRI policy review has been achieved, and that that was a possibility from the start.”

How the ticket aims to utilise ANUSA resources to mobilise greater and more compelling pro-Palestine protests however remains unclear.     

While most other tickets have overlapping and vague policies on the Governance Review, Left Action maintains a clear opposition to it. 

The Review lists a set of 31 recommendations ranging from making the ANUSA executive the board of directors for the Union, to removing autonomous department constitutions and removing  the ANUSA Environment Collectives department status. The Review also found that ANUSA political activism, namely pro-Palestinian activism, is “alienating” to students. 

For Left Action, the review signals an effort to suppress pro-Palestinian activism. They state, “The ANUSA incumbents have commissioned a governance review that is trying to restrict the capacity of our union to fight for Palestine. Left Action rejects the governance review and will fight to protect every student’s right to campaign against genocide.”   

Reich told Woroni, “It has to be remembered that only 30 students were consulted for this, 20 of whom from the existing student political faction. So the sample size for this governance review is highly biased.” 

For members of this ticket, rejecting the Review is pertinent to combatting the crackdown on pro-Palestine activism. As Reich elaborates, “There is a general crackdown on Palestine activism, which like not being open about being pro Palestine, or not being forthright or clear about all of that feeds into, in some ways, so obviously, the governance review, I think in some ways, it’s an expression of that the sample size of students have, like, basically argued against Palestine activism.” 

However, despite the ticket’s bold promises on Palestinian advocacy, members of Left Action have been absent from key protests such as the protests against the School of Art and Design (SOAD) and the School’s alleged censorship of “pro-Palestinian art”.  

“Shit’s too expensive” 

The ticket puts forward three main policies on the cost of living, each bold in its own respect, “Free education”, “Rent caps for on and off campus accommodation” and a “liveable Youth Allowance and Job Seeker.” 

It is almost indisputable that most university students, with an average HECs debt of $26,000, will be supportive of more affordable education. However, how the ticket will advocate for this massive reform, one which has not been seen in Australia since the 1980s, is not elaborated on.  

Reich told Woroni, “We can’t really speak to the fact that there’s going to be a campaign which is going to successfully bring about free education, but I think part of it is about raising people’s expectations for that.“ 

He continues, “As we carry out defensive struggles, we also need to argue for what we want and what we think should happen. And realistically, in the current Australian climate, [free education] is totally possible, not because of the political will of any of the major parties. That’s totally lacking, but the amount of money which is in the economy, the amount of fucking money which is spent on coal subsidies and all of that…” 

Perhaps the ticket’s clearer policy is its commitment to the National Union of Students (NUS). Socialist Alternative make up one of the smaller factions within the NUS, electing at least one factional member in the Union’s executive. 

The ticket promises to fight from, “within the National Union of Students to run campaigns for free education (for domestic and international students), and make welfare liveable.” While the ticket claims that the “Labor Party” is its “main enemy in the government”,  its collaboration with the NUS is somewhat contradictory given the Union is dominated by Labor aligned factions. 

The latter two policies of the ticket on Youth Allowance and housing affordability only address the matters at a broader level, without providing an actual policy plan for how the ticket will combat these issues. 

The ticket’s refusal to put forward service-based policies reveal its platform’s inadequacies in addressing smaller scale student needs. Earlier this year, the record high usages of ANUSA welfare services have become symbolic of the increasing demands for the Union to use its funding to provide students critical services such as food assistance, legal and academic assistance as well as accommodation grants.

“Climate Action” and “Social Justice” 

The final two policies of the ticket target the climate crisis, and issues such as access to abortions, transphobia, homophobia and racism, the latter issues which the ticket states requires an “activist response”.  

The ticket states as much as, “By maintaining research ties and investments in weapons companies ANU is complicit in not only the genocide in Gaza but also the worsening climate crisis.”

Under its current Student Services and Amenities Fees (SSAF) agreement, ANUSA receives three million dollars in funding, making it one of the highest paid student unions in Australia. This funding has been significant in addressing student welfare needs, especially in times when their University fails to do so.  

It is clear that the Left Action ticket intends to realign ANUSA with a long-held tradition of student activism, making its priority one of advocacy and activism for causes such as free education and weapons divestment. However, for a student body which has grown dissatisfied with its Union, will these ambitious, yet vague policies be enough?

N.B. This article is written, edited and approved by the Woroni Board of Editors. The contents of this article is not a reflection of any one person’s views, but rather aims to provide a comprehensive analysis and criticism on the policy platforms of the ANUSA tickets. This is in line with Woroni’s annual coverage of the ANUSA election, where we publish commentary and analysis of all ANUSA tickets. In the coming days, Woroni will publish similar articles on all the tickets. Please contact woroninewseditor@gmail.com with any concerns.