Peachey Allan: Education Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Peachey Allan: Education Amendment Bill (No 3) — First Reading 
[Sitting date: 23 September 2008. Volume:650;Page:19057. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
: 
 Well here it is—the Education Amendment Bill (No 3). That is all the Government has to show for 9 years in office three Ministers and goodness knows how many Associate Ministers. In the last days of this Parliament and in the dying days of that Government it has dropped this bill under urgency into the House. That alone is good enough reason to oppose the bill and I say the National Party does oppose it.  
I assume that what we heard from New Zealand First’s Mr Jones was his final address in the House. I wish he had told us that earlier; we could have got a bit of a muster for him. But I hope that he will go back read his  
Hansard 
 and just reflect a little on some of the things he actually said. You see one of the problems with this bill is that it is typical of the Labour Government. It looks back—it looks back. It in no way looks forward to what will be the critical issues in New Zealand education.  
Hon Shane Jones 
: But you don’t know them. 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: Well the list member Mr Jones has been shouting a lot tonight— 
Hone Harawira 
: Shane! 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: —oh yes; I would not want him to be confused with my friend from New Zealand First—but he needs to reflect on one thing. I am a bit of a fan of Gilbert and Sullivan operettas and I can see in  
Trial by Jury 
 
a role for Mr Jones. He could be just slipped in there somewhere as the clown or the fool wandering around looking under chairs looking at benches and seeking high office. That is Mr Shane Jones.  
I want to talk a little about teacher registration and the registration provisions of this bill because as I have said it is very backward looking. This bill tidies up the results of the misadministration of the Government but it is very important that this House is under no illusions as to what teacher registration means. I ask members not to confuse it please with teacher competence. It is easy to say we have a great registration system and all the rest of it but that does not equate to having teacher competence. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Why isn’t this member the education spokesperson? 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: The members opposite who are challenging me need to just reflect on that. They can go to any number of Education Review Office reports on schools and they will find statements like “Some teachers in this school”—or “Several teachers in this school”—“do not teach the New Zealand curriculum properly.” or “They are do not know how to maintain correct relationships in classrooms.” That is in report after report from the Education Review Office. But when somebody like myself asks the next question: “Are the teachers to whom the Education Review Office is drawing attention registered?” the answer is always yes. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: How’s Selwyn College? 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: Oh Selwyn College will do very very well because the people of Tamaki have a member of Parliament who is prepared to stand up for children. Frankly if some of the members opposite had the same sort of integrity that I have and put the interests of children first a lot of New Zealand children would be getting a better education. I will defend the actions I have taken towards Selwyn College before anybody at any time and I would welcome a debate with the Labour Party about what constitutes a good school.  
I was talking about teacher registration. Many people in the education sector will tell us that the current teacher registration system actually gets in the way of the sort of professional standards that teachers need to be developing in order to have fulfilling successful careers in the 21st century.  
I move now to the truancy provisions in this bill. You know those provisions are a classic example of the Labour Government’s policy towards education over 9 years. What has it done with regard to truancy? It has spent a heap of money— 
Anne Tolley 
: But not very well. 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: —but not well—and employed a whole new pile of administrative structures again not very well and now that this Government is in its dying days as a Government it has finally occurred to it that even with that expense that waste of billions of dollars none of that has worked. So what has it done? Have Government members gone back and looked at themselves and looked at how they have caused this situation? Have they acknowledged at long last the failure of their approach: building huge bureaucracies and giving people cars to drive around in clipboards and a sense of importance? It is now clear that that approach has not worked. We need just to go to South Auckland and talk to some of the people in the ministry there and they will tell us that approach is not working and why it is not working.  
So what has the Government done? It has landed on boards of trustees on principals and on teachers. That is what it has done. There has been much more work for schools to do and much more money to be expended all because the Government has failed in terms of the bureaucracies it has set up to deal with truancy. Schools were actually doing pretty well in the 1990s with regard to issues like truancy. They were doing pretty well. Truancy is much much worse now than it has ever been because of the way that the Labour Government has handled it. And what is its answer now? You see again this is classic socialist educational policy: find another reason to blame teachers principals and boards. It is classic socialist educational policy. In the last— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Let it all out! 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: Mr Cosgrove has a lot to say tonight. Am I to assume that he will not be giving a valedictory statement tomorrow and this is it? We do not think that he will be back. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I’ll see you out Grandad. 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: Well I tell Mr Cosgrove that we will see—we shall see.  
I will finish with reference to the special education provision here. Although I welcome the acknowledgment of the role of special schools I have to ask the questions: “Why has it taken 9 years?” and “What about the real issue for special schools in this country?” which is the need for them to expand their capability their ability to work on a broader front with the least fortunate of our children. Again that is just another example of this Government— 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: Come on Grandad wind it up. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Repeated reference to a member’s age is out of order; I refer to Speaker’s ruling 38/7. 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: I am not offended by references to my age because I know that unlike the younger members opposite I have actually achieved something in life. I came to Parliament after I had succeeded in life not instead of succeeding in life.  
I will finish on the point that the capability of our special schools is what people who are looking forward are looking at. But here we have one more example of looking backwards. The National Party will not support this bill; we have very very good reason for not supporting it. I do not believe that it will proceed beyond its first reading. Thank you.