Donald Rod: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Donald Rod: Public Finance (State Sector Management) Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee 
[Sitting date: 14 December 2004. Volume:622;Page:17883. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
ROD DONALD (Co-Leader—Green) 
: 
 I think it is time to shed a little light and a little less heat on Part 3 and in particular on schedule 6B. I look forward to Deborah Coddington taking a call on this part her having spoken on it when we were debating a previous part. 
I too listened very carefully to the concerns of the tertiary educational institutions—as expressed by Mr Stuart McCutcheon in particular and also by Mr Robin Mann whom I see quite often—and I have really struggled to understand what it is that they are concerned about which is not to say that I am indifferent to their wish to maintain the autonomy and academic freedom of tertiary educational institutions. The Green Party strongly backs the vital role of those institutions as critics and as the conscience of our society. But after some considerable examination we simply cannot see how this bill undermines the autonomy and freedom that those institutions have. Balanced against their desires is the need for the Government to exercise a degree of accountability for any organisation that receives taxpayer funding and to ensure that there is a degree of transparency as to how that funding is applied. 
I find it intriguing to hear John Key from the National Party wax lyrical about the constraints that tertiary educational institutions are under given that they became Crown entities in June 1993. I am sure that the Minister can confirm for me that in June 1993 the National Party was in Government and therefore it was National that added tertiary educational institutions to the fourth schedule of the Public Finance Act and therefore it was National that would have done any undermining that Mr Key is now complaining about. It is quite a contradiction on his part to claim that this bill is undermining tertiary educational institutions when in fact at the end of the day particularly because of Supplementary Order Paper 315 this bill maintains the legislative status quo for tertiary educational institutions. Indeed in schedule 6B they are given a separate category of Crown entity in recognition of their distinctive character and relationship with the Crown. So I will be interested to see whether National members take any more calls to criticise their own behaviour in 1993 because in effect that is what they are doing. They are now admitting they made a mistake back then and they want to reverse it—or perhaps they are just grandstanding. 
We have before us a bill that has been significantly amended from when it was first introduced. In relation to tertiary educational institutions particularly because of representations made by the Vice-Chancellors Committee Supplementary Order Paper 315 makes a significant number of concessions to the tertiary sector by removing from schedule 6B the application of sections 174 175 199 210 and 212. That really does put the situation on a par with the status quo. I know—because the select committee was told—that one of the outstanding matters the issue of consolidation is being addressed by the Financial Reporting Standards Board. The tertiary educational institutions agree with that. 
I accept the tertiary sector’s concern and I am sure I will be lobbied further on this matter but I believe that on balance the status quo is maintained—a status quo that was introduced by the previous National Government. We believe that the Education Act 1989 provides tertiary educational institutions with sufficient protection from Government interference and that this bill provides the degree of accountability and transparency that Parliament and the Government require.