June 2025 SRC Wrapup - (E)motional Damage

This meeting was the 4th SRC meeting for this year’s council. For those just tuning in now, the SRC’s role is to advocate for students. This takes the form of lobbying the university on issues, funding student initiatives and running events relevant to a given Office Bearer’s portfolio, as well as organising and engaging in protest. The council is consulted on many operational matters within UNSW, but does not have the final say.

President Diya Sengupta from 365 opened the meeting with an Acknowledgement of Country, reaffirming the acknowledgements' importance. She said that if we are going to spend so much time on motions then she felt it only right to spend a bit more time on the acknowledgement as well. I also think that it is important to treat this section of the meeting as important rather than just a footnote. Sengupta raised that the Sorry Day anniversary, when then Prime Minister Kevin Rudd made a National apology to the Stolen Generations, had passed recently, with the apology occurring on May 26, 2008 (although the date goes back to 1998, when the first Sorry Day occurred, arising from a grassroots movement dubbed ‘the people’s apology’). Sengupta also mentioned the 1997 Bringing Them Home report and its 54 recommendations, of which over 90 percent have not been implemented to this day. Sengupta finished by saying that we are settlers on this land and need to take responsibility and go beyond our words and into action.

The President then noted the many motions that had been brought forward this meeting, requesting the council try and consolidate motions in future, asking them to think “What has changed since the last motion or last time this issue was discussed?”

Motion 1: Keep University Childcare in-house – moved by Students with Disabilities Officer Conroy Blood.

Blood stated this motion was being put forward in collaboration with the National Tertiary Education Union’s (NTEU) campaign to keep and/or bring childcare in house, in response to the cost-of-living crisis and ABC’s 7:30 report, which found rampant corruption and abuse in private childcare centres.

Welfare Officer Brendan Tate from SAlt moved an amendment for the motion to call for childcare to be made free as well, which Blood accepted.

Tate, speaking for the motion, said that this is a basic right for students and staff, as well as calling the Childcare system in this country a crime, citing especially the privatisation of childcare, which hasn’t halted under Labor.

The motion passed unopposed.

Motion 2: For there to be two supplementary exam blocks – moved by Councillor Daniel Gulic from Together Again, authored by Secretary Akash Nagarajan, also from Together Again.

Gulic argued that more of these blocks would help working students and others. The motion passed unopposed.

Motion 3: “Good riddance Dutton, but Labor promises nothing” – moved by Education Officer Jamie Tyers from SAlt.

Tyers said there isn’t anything to celebrate in a Labor victory, saying their cost-of-living relief is really just private subsidies, and their real agenda is seen in AUKUS and attacks on workers.

SAlt Councillor Louisa Chen called Labor one of the most anti-worker and anti-union parties. There were giggles from Together Again when she mentioned the government's attacks on the CMFEU. 

Together Again Councillor Luke Cox spoke against the motion. Cox, in his speaking time, called Labor a progressive party (which drew giggles of their own from SAlt), and said the SRC isn’t here to give full-throated support to any party. Cox mentioned the government’s regional study hubs, then implied SAlt doesn’t know where the regions are, offering them a map.

Environment Officer Emma Terry from SAlt shot back, telling Cox that if he wants to talk about the regions, he should talk about the natural disasters and the lack of support for those affected. She also brought up NSW Labor’s denial of a pay raise for nurses. President Sengupta called time on Terry, who continued speaking. Sengupta said, “You have like 10 other motions to use the same speaking points”. 

Tyers replied, “We will, don’t worry.”

Together Again councillors voted against this motion. Ethnocultural Officer Ethan Lin abstained. The motion carried.

Motion 4: The SRC demands action on the climate after NSW floods – by Environment Officer Emma Terry from SAlt.

Terry outlined how the recent floods had been worse than the record-breaking floods from 2021-2022, and how emergency services had been incapable of fully responding to such a massive event. She said this was the product of a Labor government in power. She went on to link these disasters, which hurt housing availability, to the housing crisis. 

Welfare Officer Tate from SAlt, speaking for, said that there needs to be a massive increase to emergency services on top of cutting global emissions, of which Australia is a large contributor.

Women’s Officer Ellena Cheers-Flavell of 365 spoke for the motion, citing her parents being impacted by the floods and the still unrepaired damage many faced from hailstorms from years ago as the reason for her support. She said that while people do step up in these times of crisis, it shouldn’t be up to individuals to respond to these crises – the government should step up and help.

The motion carried.

Motion 5: Oppose NSW Labor’s attacks on Workers’ compensation – moved by Councillor Louisa Chen from SAlt.

Chen stated NSW Premier Chris Minns had just launched a huge attack on workers by raising the threshold of psychological injury workers' compensation from 15% to 30% impairment. Chen said that 95% of people will be shut out of compensation because of this. She raised that frontline workers are especially vulnerable and are being denied pay rises by the NSW government at the same time.

Councillor Gulic raised an amendment to make an elaboration that would call out NSW Treasurer Daniel Mookhey and encourage students to join their unions to oppose attacks on worker’s rights. 

Chen opposed the amendment on the grounds that it should be the Premier being condemned, not simply the Treasurer. The amendment for the motion as presented, limited the motion’s criticism of NSW Labor to just the Treasurer. She tweaked the amendment to fit with her intention, and the motion was carried unopposed. 

SAlt member Owen said there was a lack of activism mentioned in 365 member’s reports, and clarified that SAlt isn’t trying to simply have a go at Labor for their lack of action, but to encourage 365, other factions, as well as independents to join them in protest and organising.. 365’s Officer Cheers-Flavell takes issue with this characterisation.President Sengupta argued this discussion would be better placed in question time and said that if SAlt runs for President one day, then they can run the meeting however they like, but for now, she’s in charge. Tyers from SAlt says that maybe they will, and maybe it's time for them to. Historically, SAlt has not run candidates for SRC president.

Motion 6: UNSW SRC condemns Labor government housing policies for being inadequate to address the housing crisis – moved by councillor Zack Hossain from SAlt.

Hossain said the SRC should condemn Labor’s housing policies as pathetic, saying rent caps and freezes are needed.

There is some argument between SAlt and Blood about protest attendance. It is not uncommon for members of the SRC to go band for band on this issue. 

Together Again Councillor Cox says more should be done in regard to housing, given that our generation has almost entirely been priced out of housing. However, Cox wanted to applaud the government’s measures, including the Housing Australia Future Fund.

SAlt clarified their stance further, with one member saying, “We aren’t having a go at people for not attending rallies”, but rather they simply want people not just from their faction involved in the things they do. At times, this meeting felt like a strange kind of political group therapy between the left-wing blocs of the SRC, with the Labor folk left to twiddle their thumbs a little as these conversations were happening. Councillor Cox, however, did interject here to ask, if SAlt wants 365 to attend their events, why don’t they attend 365’s?Officer Terry from SAlt said they are just asking for other officers to bring up protests in reports rather than just meetings with management.

Councillor Cox jokingly said upon the mention of meetings, “Shame on you Diya, this is all your fault.”

Owen from SAlt said other groups should join in mobilisation rallies.

Officer Cheers-Flavell said to “just email us then.”

SAlt said they wanted to sort this out now, rather than in question time.

Queer Officer Alyss Cachia, happy to oblige them, said she would check her schedule 

Owen asked her to check it then and there.

In all the commotion it seems like the council forgot to actually vote on the motion.

Motion 7: A 20% cut to HECS  is not enough: we need free education – moved by SAlt Councillor Avasa Bajracharya.

Bajracharya said that the government’s 20% reduction to all students' HECS debt is a crumb of a reform, and that all the debt should be wiped.

President Sengupta spoke for the motion, saying that the Job Ready Graduates scheme doubled fees across a range of degrees, including the one she entered. She said that, for the price, these degrees are not worth it, essentially, and that instead of using debt reduction as a political tool during election campaigns, we should go back to being the benchmark for free education.

Councillor Cox came to speak against, saying that this is a horse that has been beaten to death, and said they need to find a new horse to beat. He argued that given the increase in the amount of people who now go to university compared to when there was free education, free education is no longer viable.

SAlt member Julia said Cox’s statement was “complete and utter bullshit”, citing how extensive the handouts to the wealthy from the government are, and saying that fossil fuels are undertaxed given that HECS. collects more money for the government than the petroleum resource rent tax.

Officer Terry stated that poorer parts of the world fully fund education so we should be able to.

With just the Labor-affiliated members of the council voting against, the motion passed.Tyers proposes moving two motions together in exchange for 365 and Officer Blood checking their schedule for collaboration with SAlt. This is accepted.

Motions 8 and 9: The UNSW SRC endorses campaigns against course and staff cuts across Australia AND The SRC demands no cuts in the move back to semesters. 

SAlt councillor Anais Williamson spoke for, saying we shouldn’t trust the university not to slip cuts in while they make timetable changes. 

SAlt councillor Jacob Mulholland spoke for the motion as well, saying lobbying the university is like bringing a papier mâché knife to a gunfight, also calling out the former SRC administrations that had been run by the right of the Labor party, who he says signed off on these cuts and changes.

The motion passed unopposed. 

Motion 10: The SRC opposes the requisition changes to Arc’s constitution at its Annual General Meeting – moved by 365 councillor Joseph Bellia.

Bellia outlined the constitutional changes proposed by Arc, which would change the required signatures for a petition to trigger an Extraordinary General Meeting from 50 to 500. He implored the SRC to attend the AGM and vote against these changes.

Queer Officer Alyss Cachia spoke for the motion, saying the changes were clearly to stop motions like weapons divestment from passing and stopping students to hold proxies, as the changes would also only allow the chair to hold proxies 

Barring the Labor-affiliated members, all voted for, so the motion passed. The Arc AGM was held on June 4th, and the changes were passed into the Arc constitution despite the SRC’s opposition.

Motion 11- The SRC demands Australia cut ties with the US – by Welfare Officer Brendan Tate.

Tate opened by saying Australia is rapidly becoming a “beachhead of US imperialism” and that this makes us a target.

Officer Cachia, speaking for, said it’s funny that there isn’t enough money for amazing social programs, but we are happy to throw our money around when the US asks. 

Councillor Cox spoke against, saying, “As progressive patriots, we should have an independent foreign policy”. He said SAlt is fearmongering about war with China, which is unlikely as the Chinese President seems very amicable to the Australian government. Cox claims this rhetoric makes Asian students unsafe at UNSW.

Officer Tyers argued back with Cox, saying that Australia’s foreign policy has been predatory even outside of collaboration with the US.

The motion carried, with only Together Again voting against. 

Motion 12: Transparency in spending – moved by Students with Disabilities Officer Conroy Blood. 

Blood said this isn’t going to force SRC members to make a line item of every purchase, but rather for them to cite what project it is being used for so the student body can know what their money is being spent on. Officer Cachia said making this public could make it easier for the SRC to argue for budget increases.

The motion passed unanimously.

Motion 13: Accessibility in meetings – also moved by Conroy Blood.

Blood said that allowing interruptions during people’s speaking time made meetings hard to follow, and speaking over people isn’t necessary as there is ample time for dissent when speaking against.

Queer Officer Ren Woodward spoke for the motion, saying that activism without accessibility pushes out disabled people. They said there is a way to make our voices heard that at the same time does not silence others. 

Officer Terry from SAlt spoke against, saying this is a terrible way to make spaces more accessible for people and that the Safer Spaces policy limits debate. She says that former President Paige Sedgwick weaponised this policy against SAlt. 

Officer Cachia, speaking for, tried to quell the worry, saying that opening this policy up for review meant that the policy could be changed by the council, and that this is about reviewing the policy rather than keeping it as is.

Officer Tyers spoke against, saying it would limit free speech and allow a future SRC to weaponise the policy.

Cachia interrupts Tyers while he is speaking to argue how hard it is to speak with someone talking over you. Tyers asked for more speaking time, which President Sengupta denied him.

In his right of reply, Blood asked why SAlt won’t amend the motion rather than just vote against it.

With the SAlt bloc unswayed by the arguments presented to them, it looked like for a moment we were on the verge of a historic moment in this year’s SRC – a motion failing. Instead, the votes went 50/50 either way, with President Sengupta breaking the tie, resolving the matter in the affirmative. This motion’s success marks a symbolic defeat for the SAlt bloc that constitutes a plurality within the SRC. 

Matter for discussion: The SRC expresses its concern over the recent assault of a couple in Eastgardens, moved by Ethnocultural Officer Ethan Lin from EDGE.

Lin raised how the Asian community and people of colour are afraid to go out in public, as even if they aren’t subject to assault, harassment is still very common.

President Sengupta said the SRC should come to support international students and meet them on the platforms they frequent, rather than expecting them to come to the SRC.

Councillor Cox said signage in additional languages other than the languages already used would be helpful, pointing attention to the large community of Indonesian students at UNSW. 

Office Bearer reports/Question time 

In her report, President Sengupta outlined how Clothes Hub has become the SRC’s most successful campaign ever, bringing mutual aid to UNSW. She mentioned it has been extended to 3 dates this term. Sengupta wrapped up by encouraging people to look at all forms of activism, including mutual aid, if they want to champion an activist SRC.

Gamamari reporter Sankalp asks Tyers regarding the Arc AGM, to paraphrase “is it or is it not true that you were willing to use quorum policy to stack the EGM or pull quorum if too many pro-Israeli students showed up; is that why you oppose quorum changes?” The EGM in question was put forward last year by 365 to divest from unethical investments, including weapons, in the wake of Israel’s ongoing invasion of Gaza. I should disclose again here that 365 was the faction I ran with last year, and this EGM was a key part of our campaign. 

Tyers answered that quorum changes are anti-democratic.

Sankalp said the EGM hit the 500 attendants required, so why should these changes not go ahead?

SAlt generally seemed to have something of an issue with the way the question was being asked. 

In his report, Joseph Bellia stated that many executives were disillusioned with Arc’s proposed changes, but the university is receptive to SRC feedback. He went on to say meetings therefore, are productive, not to discount protest, but clothes-hub needed meetings to exist, and members of the SRC can choose to play to their own strengths.

Officer Cachia did the meeting evaluation, saying it is impressive that the council got through so many motions in such a short time, and said there was strong debate present across a range of issues

The meeting closed at 5 minutes to 9.