It has been a big year for tertiary education in politics. Fees-free was cut, student support has been chipped away at, and somehow we are still expected to believe that young people feel politically represented. That’s why it’s a little rich when students actually ask our political leaders to come and talk to us, and most of them don’t bother showing up.
Last Tuesday, OUSA’s election “leaders” debate took place. Students got something closer to a tertiary spokesperson debate. According to OUSA Political Rep Flynn Nisbett, students are "incredibly disapointed”. Considering he invited the parties in February, and followed up in June, I’d say “disappointed” is an understatement. I am fucking livid.
And it’s not just about who is missing. The questions were written specifically for party leaders or deputy leaders, asking them to make commitments and pledges on behalf of their parties. Many of the MPs sent along aren’t leaders or even deputy leaders. They simply don't have the authority to make those promises. I think this was seen in how much jumping around the question was happening on stage, especially for ‘yes or no’ questions that no one seemed capable of answering with anything shorter than a (meaningless) paragraph.
So, did the parties actually send adequate representation? I’d argue no. Despite OUSA giving parties seven months to get their A into G. And, according to Flynn, the problem wasn't simply that parties’ leaders were unavailable. ACT was the only party to get back to him early and clearly say David Seymour would not be attending. National and Labour reportedly said their leaders would attend if the other leader was going to be there, while New Zealand First, the Opportunity Party and Te Pāti Māori kept OUSA waiting without giving a clear answer.
I find that arguably worse than just not showing up. If your party leader isn’t coming, just say so. Students can handle being told no. What is harder to swallow is being strung along for months, only to have politicians ultimately decide that showing up isn't worth their time.
And this isn't just about OUSA or Flynn's feelings being hurt. It's about the message that behaviour sends to students as voters. Political parties spend months asking young people to enrol, to vote, to care about democracy and engage with politics. But when students organise an actual opportunity for politicians to engage with them, suddenly the enthusiasm seems to disappear.
The country's youngest voters are already disengaged. Just 53% are enrolled to vote, making this the sixth consecutive election-year decline. We are constantly told that young people need to enrol, educate themselves and participate in democracy. Then, when we actually try to participate, our political leaders can't be bothered to meet us halfway. It’s especially hard to swallow when 85% of MPs have a tertiary qualification. They’ve been in our shoes. In fact, as was pointed out at the debate, many had it considerably better than us, receiving subsidised, or even free tertiary education.
Yes, university students tend to lean left. Yes, some parties probably aren't expecting to sweep the student vote. But politics isn't something where you can only show up when you know you’re going to get a five-star review.
We are told our generation is apathetic, lazy, and unrealistic. Then, when we actually turn up and ask to be heard, the people asking for our votes don't.
So, leaders: next time students invite you to the table, maybe fucking show up.
