Hughes Gareth: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hughes Gareth: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10296] 
GARETH HUGHES (Green) 
: 
 Kia ora Mr Chairperson. Nga mihi nui ki a koutou kia ora. The Greens are the only party opposing this bill and we do so because we believe that this bill is a wolf in sheep’s clothing. The asserted aims of this bill are to introduce information matching between the ministry and the New Zealand Teachers Council to spot uncertified teachers to toughen suspension procedures for teachers under investigation and to reduce compliance costs relating to police vetting. However there are unspoken aims in this bill that are not written about in the bill’s description. These aims are to create the conditions required for direct corporate management of public schools to strip the Education Review Office of oversight of integrated schools and to introduce National Certificate of Educational Achievement testing into special schools. 
The bill has all the hallmarks of a wolf in sheep’s clothing. There are some good points contained in the bill like the changes to the vetting of tradespeople in schools or the teacher registration clauses which we think are quite reasonable and we would support. But on the balance of evidence we will not be supporting this bill. 
Over the course of this debate enough people have talked about the positive sides of the bill so I will cover the points in the bill we are opposed to. Firstly we do not support and did not support the introduction of the term “body corporate” when appointing statutory managers in schools needing help nor did we support entrenchment and corporatisation which are not in the interests of the public education system. The bill would allow the Secretary for Education to appoint a corporate sole or body corporate as a limited statutory manager or as a commissioner for the board of a school as well as giving the Minister discretion to establish a combined board for two or more schools. This would allow the private running of multiple public schools by a single corporate entity effectively privatising our public schools—good for some but not for the high-quality public education Kiwis demand. 
Yes the Labour Party got some good amendments in the Education and Science Committee such as changing the bill to allow a natural person being named as part of the body corporate but for the Greens the substantive issue is still there. We are concerned at the changes to school governance. I do not believe the arguments in favour of the changes proposed have yet been convincingly put by anyone in this Chamber. We are opposed to the combining of boards of trustees when this could lead to external control of unique school communities. As a former board of trustees member myself I am proud that the Green Party is standing up for public ownership and local governance of the public school system. 
Likewise the Green Party stands with the submitters from the Quality Public Education Coalition who are concerned that the legislation was potentially legitimising corporate control in public schools as opposed to local autonomy and local control. Our concerns have only been intensified by the proposals for school buildings to be owned in public-private partnerships. Our children’s schools are not a worthwhile experiment as the Minister of Finance Bill English has said. They are a core public service. 
The long-term effect of this ownership model is to undermine State responsibility for schools and to take a further step towards the privatisation of our treasured public resources. The profit motive has no role in our public schools. The question that has to be asked is where this profit is going to come from. What will be the cut to pay the shareholders and who is paying the bottom line? Obviously it has a role in the private sector but not in the public school system where equity is essential. We would support a complete review of Tomorrow’s Schools rather than these piecemeal changes. It is a lonely vote for the Greens tonight but we are showing the value of an independent party in this Chamber that is prepared to look at both the good and the bad of legislation coming before us. I am proud to be voting No on this bill tonight.