Flavell Te Ururoa: Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:659;Page:8608] 
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
: 
 Tena koe Mr Assistant Speaker. Merry Christmas to you in case I do not see you later on and a happy New Year. Kia ora tatou katoa e te Whare. 
I do not think it is any surprise that every time the Maori Party stands in this House we stand firm I think and I hope on the foundation of kaupapa Maori. What is kaupapa Maori? It is the inherited values of our ancestors. We hope that we bring those values to every debate as we seek to represent the authentic independent voice of Maori in this Parliament. Central to our approach has been the commitment to kotahitanga to a common unity of purpose. A commitment to kotahitanga is not mutually exclusive. It can also embrace diversity and difference. Importantly it requires the representation of all interests within the scope of the overall design. 
When we looked at the proposals for the new interventions framework for the polytechnic sector we thought about how best to ensure representation issues were taken seriously. Our aspiration has always been for increased Maori representation on tertiary governance bodies including mana whenua and Maori student representation. Yet the Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill moves in the opposite direction in that the size of the polytechnic councils would be reduced from between 12 and 20 members to eight members with four of the eight members to be appointed by the Minister for Tertiary Education. In effect this means that there will be no guaranteed seats for staff students iwi Maori and community representatives. This is completely against the aspiration we hold in the Maori Party and as a consequence we voiced our opposition in our vote in the first reading. We knew that providing for only one community member would mean that most Maori representative seats would be scrapped. 
There is no provision in the current legislation for Maori representatives of any kind. Although some might refer to the requirement of section 171(4) of the Education Act that “It is desirable that the council of an institution should reflect so far as is reasonably practicable—(a) the ethnic and socio-economic diversity of the communities served by the institution;” in practice it is basically a toothless provision. 
In the Committee stage I noted that we cannot rely on those sorts of clauses for the special status of Maori because they do not address the constitutional significance of the Treaty in any debate on Maori representation. Our constituencies have elected us into Parliament to do everything we can to advance their aspirations. Fear of failure cannot be a justification not to try something. Our members have always urged us to act believing that it is far better to try and fail than to fail to try in the first place. 
During the Committee stage I put forward an amendment to establish a process for Maori representation that would be transparent and clearly stated whereby the appointee truly reflects the values and aspirations of the community. The idea was to create not only a requirement for Maori representation but also for it to come from across the board: two academic staff positions with one for Maori and two student positions with one for Maori as well as Maori community representation. All community representative nominations would need to at least be passed by local hapu and iwi. The amendments increase the membership of the polytechnic councils from eight to 12 and they reinstate compulsory seats for the vice-chancellor academic staff students and community-appointed members. In addition specific provision is made for Maori membership on the council in order to give real expression to the Treaty of Waitangi. 
The issue of Maori student representation on councils has always been of great importance for Maori students and to Te Mana Akonga the association of Maori students across all campuses. That organisation has a Treaty claim to amend the Education Act to explicitly provide for Maori student membership so the amendment we put forward was a positive signal to that very large constituency that there are members of Parliament who are willing to listen and to learn from their leadership. 
The issue of a Maori staff representative has also been of much interest among our membership and indeed right across the education sector. We were keen that the polytechnic councils would be able to benefit from members who have the capacity to uphold academic standards in teaching learning and research. It was also a deliberate effort to try to layer in greater recognition of kaupapa Maori in both standards and methodologies. Of course it is not solely an issue of representation but is also one of the complexity of well-intentioned legislation with mismatched policy inconsistent strategy and mismatched business plans. I am reminded of the saying by another great Te Arawa philosopher: “Never be afraid to try something new. Remember amateurs built the ark; professionals built the  
Titanic 
.” 
The legislators policy makers writers and architects of the tertiary education governance arrangements sure had the highest intentions but if it does not make a difference on the ground then surely we need to take the risk and look for solutions that will. That was where we were coming from in terms of our bicultural model that recognises Maori representation on polytechnic councils. The Maori Party has greatly valued the support of the Waiariki Institute of Technology in developing this model. It is about representation within a new paradigm that was all about our recognition and representation against the Treaty model. What we want is very simple. As far as is possible we want to see councils reflect the ethnic and socio-economic diversity of the communities they serve. It is pretty simple. 
There is an important element to the discussion that I believe members of the House need to consider. If we acknowledge that the larger proportion of Maori constituents fall within the lowest socio-economic bracket which we also acknowledge stems largely from Crown policies retarding Maori social and economic growth from as early as 1840 then surely it makes sound economic sense to recognise that the clauses alone will not serve the wider interests of the group. The greatest of high-flying intentions will amount to nothing unless there are faces at the table to speak to the immediate short-term and long-term needs of all the people across the community. 
Inconsistency within the legislation the Treasury allocation to each ministry the policy writers’ approach to give actual meaning to these clauses and the strategic and business plans within our public agencies are what have let us down. This repetitive failure forces us as a party to demand more on behalf of Maori but what we are really asking for is clear consistency and equal access for all people within Aotearoa who sit every day within a less privileged position. Unfortunately for all of us Maori make up a far greater majority within that grouping and this is why we are forced to ask the hard questions. 
At the select committee stage Te Runanga o Manukau Institute of Technology took these views to the table. It recommended that consideration be given to the inclusion of a Maori directorate function in its case known as Te Amorangi. In the legislation there is an acknowledgment of the high percentage of unemployed and uneducated tangata whenua in the Counties-Manukau area. Other submitters also echoed that view. The New Zealand Nurses Organisation suggested that diverse communities cannot be adequately represented by a single person. The students association of the Nelson Marlborough Institute of Technology also made the point that students are key stakeholders in polytechnics and contribute a lot to their councils so their views should be heard. 
It is all now part of the record that we were unsuccessful in having our amendments voted into law but we tried and we will continue to try to ensure that polytechnics are of the people that Parliament is of the people and ultimately that the people are why we are actually here. We will continue to work with the Minister to find a way to address our pleas and we are hopeful of some momentum being gained. 
In closing I reflect on the Hon Trevor Mallard’s statement. Even he will acknowledge that if legislation is going to pass in this House and it can be done without Maori Party support I suppose that is the situation in terms of the democracy of the House. But we have stated our case and we will continue to state our case into the future. As a parting shot I hope that if there are members who wish to espouse the place of Maori at the representative table then over the holidays it would be good for them to look towards the correct pronunciation of Maori words as a starting point. It would then give some meaning to the notion of allowing Maori to be at the representative table. Kia ora tatou.