The cuts at UTS have the potential to devastate students, staff, and education quality, and marginalised students will be hit hardest. Join us to demand transparency, protect courses, and ensure UTS puts students and staff before the bottom line.

The ANU’s Socially Responsible Investments Policy, adopted after years of persistent student pressure, remains in shambles. The policy prohibits investment in companies that make 20% or more of their revenue from coal, but it says nothing about oil or gas. The policy prohibits investment in companies that make civilian weapons like handguns, but not companies which make military weapons which are many times more destructive. Recently, we found that the ANU was investing over $35 million in projects that break their own emissions rules. Also, ANU’s most recent documents show a $32.7 million investment in BHP, one of Australia’s biggest producers of thermal and metallurgical coal. They also show a $6.7 million dollar investment in Australia’s biggest oil and gas producer, Woodside Energy. We say all of those numbers should be ZERO. We need to sign this petition to signify to the university bosses that we're still not satisfied with their investment decisions.

No student should have to risk their health while paying rent. Overheated rooms lead to illness, sleep deprivation, and mental health struggles, especially for regional, remote, and international students who already face extra challenges. The World Health Organization (WHO) warns that extreme heat is a growing health crisis, worsened by climate change. Heat exposure can cause exhaustion, dehydration, and even death. It disrupts sleep, reduces focus, and harms wellbeing and academic performance. WHO stresses that safe indoor temperatures are essential. As temperatures rise, inaction is not an option. Students are paying too much to live in unsafe conditions. Real change happens when we push together. By joining this campaign, you’re demanding Curtin and UniLodge step up, stop ignoring student welfare, and provide real solutions. We won’t accept inaction. Speak up. Stand with students. Demand better living conditions—now!

13 Primary Schools utilise this pool for their learn-to-swim program, which equates to approximately 5,000 students per year. This means significant costs are now being put on schools to access pool time from Private Schools. Swim training is essential for all young Australians, particularly those without previous access to swim training.   Olympic medalist and swimming coach Peter Tonkin OAM has said every swim school in Launceston had a waiting list and the Glen Dhu pool had a shallower depth of 0.9 metres, making it safer to learn in. The message is clear, teaching children how to swim saves lives.   Tell Minister Jo Palmer the Liberals should keep their word and upgrade the Glen Dhu pool.

Young workers still face the same expenses as other workers in rent, groceries, education costs and more. But in our unfair system, an 18-year-old with years of experience could be paid less than their 21-year-old newly hired colleague just because of their age. Sign the petition today if you agree everyone should be paid fairly regardless of their age!

TAFE teachers like me are dealing with unsustainable workloads and massive administrative burdens. Too many of us are burnt out and leaving the sector in droves, contributing to a chronic workforce shortage that must be urgently addressed.  It’s no surprise TAFE teachers are frustrated and feel like they’ve been brushed aside by the same government who promised to save TAFE more than a decade ago. Without TAFE teachers like me and my colleagues, TAFEs cannot deliver the vocational education and training that Victorians need.  The teacher shortage will only get worse and the negative impact on our students and the Victorian community will only get bigger. To make matters worse, instead of saving TAFE the state Labor government has been responsible for vocational education and training in Victoria being the lowest funded in Australia every year for the last 10 years. Premier Allan and Minister Tierney: You need to fix the dispute with TAFE teachers and invest in them and our TAFEs.   Your lack of action shows you believe it is ok for Victorians to not have proper access to high quality TAFE programs delivered by valued and respected TAFE teachers. I am calling on Premier Jacinta Allan and Minister Gayle Tierney to: • Respect TAFE teachers and pay them what they are worth. • Address excessive workloads that lead to too many teachers leaving TAFE. • Create pathways for the next generation of industry experts to become TAFE teachers. • Deliver TAFE funding that covers the actual cost of course delivery.  Please, sign my petition to tell Premier Jacinta Allan and Minister Gayle Tierney that Victorian voters want action to support TAFE teachers! Mark Zelman, Teacher at William Angliss Institute of TAFE

In the OnCampus email on Tuesday 1 October, ANU announced that it was raising its parking rates without any consultation with students and staff.  These rates are being raised by at least 177% for surface parking permits.  • Student surface permits for off-campus students are going from 512.69 in 2024 to 1,416.20 in 2025 • Student resident permits are raised from 512.69 for several parking stations to 1,416.20. • Staff permits are going from to 1,025.39 to 2,839.70 These increases will make the parking on campus entirely unaffordable for huge groups of students and staff.  They will particularly impact vulnerable groups on campus, such as disabled people, parents and carers, and people from regional and rural areas, who are more likely to rely on cars and therefore need parking on campus. This potentially breaches ANU’s ‘’Procedure: Prevention of discrimination, harassment and bullying’ in relation to provisions relating to prevention of indirect discrimination. For students who live on campus, many face walks of over forty minutes to the closest shopping centre and cannot get to work without a car. Many students from interstate cannot visit home without a car. Off-campus students and staff may not have access to any viable public transport options. While we embrace better public transport options, particularly on-campus, many ANU community members do not have a choice and should not have to pay for it with these eye-watering prices. ANU already has the lowest proportion of disadvantaged students across the country and increasing the price of things like parking actively work against making the university more accessible to people from those backgrounds. We note that the benchmarking process the ANU undertook compared ACT government parking spots, including at the Parliamentary triangle. These communities are not the same as the ANU, particularly ANU students. It is important that the ANU understands that benchmarking rates against ACT government rates will result in harm to the ANU community when it results in massive hikes. 

Tasmanians deserved a budget that invested in our critical public services, a budget that provided the resourcing required for workers to effectively deliver high quality public services to the community.   Privatisation and cuts are never the solution.   The cuts to be made through “efficiency dividends" have drawn significant criticism from prominent independent economist Saul Eslake who has labelled them “crude” and a “very poor means of achieving meaningful and lasting expenditure savings”.    The CPSU is campaigning for change (not cuts) to save our public services. 

The ANU Students Association Governance Review report represents a grave attack on student unionism at ANU. Written by an external consulting agency, in collaboration with university management, and incumbent members of the ANUSA executive, it aims to discipline Palestine activists, strip democracy of the union, and remove politics from our student association – including abolishing activist roles like the Environment Officer. The report claims that “there had been too much focus on pro-Palestine campaigning over recent months,” and states “it is crucial the president avoids becoming too involved in divisive political campaigns,” as has occurred in the context of what the report calls the “Hamas-Israel war.” This alone would be enough to oppose the report. We are living through a genocide – the greatest moral question of our generation – and every left-wing, activist institution in society, as student unions are, should dedicate serious time to opposing it. However, attacking Palestine activism is just the thin edge of the wedge in this report, which is about suppressing left-wing politics within ANUSA and undermining its democratic structures. In the eyes of the report, ANUSA should become a non-political, non-controversial body, led by a president who should be the “CEO of ANUSA”, with the “executive as the primary governing body of ANUSA”. Some of the recommendations include: • Decision-making power should be removed from the SRC, the only part of the union where ordinary students can move motions, and hold the executive to account (recommendation 1). • Institute non-elected postgraduate representatives on this executive (rec. 27). • Restrict the ability of the president to take political stances (rec. 13). • Abolish the Environment Collective and Environment Officer (rec. 6). • Abolish the Education Committee, historically the activist collective of the student union (rec. 7), and make the Education Officer into a non-activist, administrative role (rec. 8). These recommendations were produced in consultation with the Deputy Vice Chancellor of ANU, who has personally brought code of conduct cases against Palestine activists this year. The entire approach fits with university management's aspiration to limit the independence of ANUSA.  It will be brought to a vote at the next Ordinary General Meeting in Week 10, October 16th, 6pm. All students get a vote. We urge any students who oppose these changes to attend and vote. We, the undersigned, oppose this review, and affirm that ANUSA should be a pro-Palestine, activist, fighting organisation (if you're signing on behalf of a group please put the name of the group in the notes section).

Senior management at La Trobe University are proposing severe changes to the structure of degrees, coursework and student services. These include changes to ‘Course Architecture’, ‘Course Optimisation,’ and restructures to Deputy Vice Chancellor Academic Portfolio Staff, School of Agriculture, Biomedicine and Environment, School of Computing, Engineering and Mathematical Sciences, La Trobe Rural Health School, School of Humanities and Social Sciences, and Information Services Staff. These eight proposals are part of the same attack on the quality of education and on the proper governance of La Trobe, made by Theo Farrell, Jess Vanderlelie, and Rob Pike. The changes pose a severe risk to the University’s reputation, enrollments, accreditation and medium- to long-term financial position.In some cases, changes to Honours degrees may mean that students studying Honours at La Trobe do not qualify for La Trobe’s own PhD degrees. In terms of student services,  Courses and subjects are being cut across the entire university, giving students less choice about what they study. Senior academics are being made redundant and replaced by junior academics. Some staff are concerned that the Bachelor of Science and the Bachelor of Arts will become untenable in several years if these changes go ahead. La Trobe is dismantling the team of experts who provide assistance to students with a disability, replacing some of their functions with generic student services staff. Staff cannot understand how massive restructures and cuts will help La Trobe, because their rationale is unclear. Nor has Senior Management explained why these changes must be implemented so hastily. Students have not been consulted. They have been forced to organise their own meeting to demand that Senior Leadership explain these changes to them. Staff have expressed wide and deep concerns about the adverse effects of these changes. Senior leadership have ignored or dismissed these views.  Vice Chancellor Theo Farrell has been in the job for less than twelve months. If these 8 changes are part of his vision for La Trobe, we reject his pessimistic view and embrace one that respects and values the expertise of staff and students. 

The future of TAFE is at a critical juncture. With the increased demand created by Fee-Free TAFE, we must ensure that TAFE teachers and staff receive the funding and support they need to provide quality vocational education to everyone.

The outcomes of this petition should benefit students who face accessibility challenges, such as working students, students from regional or rural areas, students living with disability, students from lower socio-economic backgrounds, international students, and students with caring commitments and so on.