By Alison Dellit and Jo Williams
MELBOURNE — The May 8-9 occupation of the Melbourne University administration building was very successful. It has drawn dozens of new activists into the campaign, energised older activists and focused media, staff and student attention on the issues around education funding.
The occupation started when students marched back to the university at the end of the May 8 national day of action against fees. Some 800 students stormed through an open door and made their way to the second floor.
Police quickly advanced in an attempt to force out the students, who decided to barricade the doors. Some 250 students elected to stay.
At about 7pm, the administration cut off the lights and power, as well as denying the occupiers access to toilet facilities. In response, some students, notably members of the International Socialist Organisation, Socialist Alternative and Left Alliance proposed that the occupation pressure the university into putting on the lights by throwing office files out of the window.
This motion was eventually adopted on Friday midday, and two files were thrown out the window. One of these contained staff members' résumés and other personal information. Around 30 people left the occupation immediately following this decision.
There were several problems with this tactic.
We were occupying the human resources floor. Most of the files on that floor related to university workers, including their pay records.
This tactic put no pressure on the vice-chancellor at all. It enabled the VC to focus discussion in the media and the university on what was happening in the building, and away from the question of up-front fees. It provided a justification for the VC to bring in the police.
It damaged the occupation both by alienating staff and many students who felt the action was destructive, and by the fact that after the files went out one window, occupiers who disagreed went out the other window.
The second major debate in the occupation occurred some hours later over political demands. Members of Left Alliance argued that the demands of the occupation should be a manifesto of everything that the occupiers wanted. They should be a blueprint for a new world .
Resistance members and many others argued that the occupiers should demand that the university council reverse its decision to introduce up-front fees for undergraduate students and declare that they were not prepared to leave until the demand was met.
In the end, two sets of demands were adopted: a more general statement of belief and this specific demand on the university council. This discussion was important because the students needed to clarify for the outside world the reasons for the occupation.
If the occupation had adopted these demands more quickly, and focused more on them in communication with the media, it could have focused the issue on up-front fees clearly and specifically. The VC at no point during the occupation made a statement on up-front fees.
Both of these debates show the central weakness of the Melbourne University occupation — a lack of political strategy. Many occupiers considered it enough simply to occupy — the struggle became an end in itself.
This is a mistaken view. The occupation was a tactic which helped to focus public opinion on the campaign; the task then was to maximise this, to place the most pressure on the VC to scrap the up-front fee proposal. This pressure needed to be exerted by broadcasting the demands all over campus.
Instead, much of the attention was focused on maintaining the occupation at all costs. This weakened the occupation and sped its demise.
The occupation was a fabulous beginning, in spite of its difficulties. The 800-strong rally in support of the occupation shows that the issue is important to students at Melbourne University. A follow-up rally called at two days' notice attracted 250 people. The campaign against the administration's introduction of fees has been given a big boost.
The campaign at Melbourne University is at a critical juncture. Fifteen universities have decided not to introduce up-front fees for 1998 (ANU, UWA, USA, VUT, Flinders, Charles Sturt, UWS, LaTrobe, SCU, UCAN, James Cook, Curtin, Edith Cowan, AMC and Wollongong). Only four have decided to introduce up-front fees (Melbourne, Sydney, University of Central Queensland and Deakin).
Melbourne University is an important struggle in this battle. If we can prevent, or even make more difficult, the introduction of up-front fees for undergraduate students at Melbourne University, it will have a significant impact nationally.
A rally has been called for May 29 at 1pm outside the administration building.
With a large number of students now willing to become involved in the campaign, an angry mood amongst staff and students alike and an effective political strategy, we can force the university council to abandon up-front fees for undergraduate students.
[Jo Williams is the Melbourne University Student Union education officer and a member of Resistance. Alison Dellit is the Melbourne organiser of Resistance.]