Street Maryan: Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Street Maryan: Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:643;Page:13175] 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Associate Minister for Tertiary Education) 
: 
 I rise to take a short call on Part 1 in response to some of the points raised by the National Opposition in respect of the Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill. 
The bill does use the word “plan” a lot as the member who has just resumed her seat said and we make absolutely no apology for that. Tertiary education ought to be planned it ought to be considered carefully and it ought to be engaged with by stakeholders. That is the framework and the upshot of this bill. As a result of this bill we will have a new system for planning funding and monitoring the provision of tertiary education. 
There are some significant changes. It will be a system that is no longer demand-led it will be a system that is no longer based on inputs and it will no longer be a system with a 1-year planning and funding cycle. Spreading the plan the funding and the organisation across 3 years provides a level of security and continuity and that allows tertiary education organisations to proceed with their business. So the new system is built on a plan and it lasts for up to 3 years. The plans are developed owned and maintained by each of the tertiary education organisations. The people who have an interest in the offerings of those tertiary education organisations will be encouraged. In fact there will be a requirement that they are consulted and talked to in the course of the development of programmes and in the implementation of the plan. 
A key feature of this process is its flexibility. The contributions we have had from the Opposition have implied that a layer of stultifying bureaucracy will be applied across the top of these organisations. In fact the opposite is true. The bill does establish plans but it contains a number of provisions for those plans to be reviewed amended and replaced as needed through a collaborative process. There is some flexibility built in. 
I would like to make a couple of comments especially about clause 3 which has been amended to make clear that the principle of academic freedom is completely unfettered by the amendment bill. I welcome the reassurance that this will provide to academics in tertiary institutions. Although that provision was already present in the legislation this provides additional reassurance and demonstrates that academic freedom is in no way jeopardised by these reforms. 
The part currently under consideration does the bulk of the work in this reform bill. It sets out the legal mechanisms that allow for the plans which I have already referred to to be developed and approved then changed if need be. It sets out the mechanisms that the Tertiary Education Commission might use to monitor the performance of tertiary education organisations. That is right and proper. It is also important to note that there is no prohibition or control. The repeated notion that the Government represents some sort of commissariat that dictates what is taught completely misrepresents and distorts the function of the Government. Of course if a programme offered in a tertiary education organisation is funded by the Government the Government through the Tertiary Education Commission is responsible for ensuring that the courses are delivered as they are meant to be. The commission has no reach over programmes that are not funded by the Government. 
I refer to Supplementary Order Paper 161 in the name of Dr Paul Hutchison and respond to some of the points he made earlier. As much as I admire Dr Hutchison and take no exception to him as a person in any way the Supplementary Order Paper is completely redundant. It is a second bite of the cherry it seems. The very points that the member raises have already been disposed of by the Education and Science Committee. The National Party is having another go at what did not make it through the process of the select committee. The issues around the shape of consultation requirements on tertiary education organisation plans the publication of the tertiary education strategy the reasonableness of Tertiary Education Commission decision-making and the potential exposure of commercially sensitive information have all already been addressed. Dr Hutchison’s amendments are considered to be unnecessary repetitious and altogether unhelpful which is why the Supplementary Order Paper should fail despite the niceness of the member who puts it forward.