Yates Dianne: Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Yates Dianne: Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:639;Page:9085] 
DIANNE YATES (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to speak on the Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill. I must say that that was not the most erudite speech on education I have ever heard in this House. In fact I would say that it was rather devoid of ideas and alternative policy; it was a knee-jerk negative rant rather than an informed and erudite speech on tertiary education. 
Last week the University of Waikato held a stakeholders’ breakfast. That stakeholders’ breakfast is the type of thing this bill is talking about. The university meets with people in the community who are interested in what the university is turning out the types of courses it is running the sorts of graduates it will produce and how it will meet the needs of the community. I congratulate the university on working towards the type of plan that is referred to in this particular legislation. 
This morning the Waikato Chamber of Commerce had a meeting which was addressed by Graham Smith. Graham Smith is the man who is responsible for Katolyst. “Katolyst” is a combination of the words “Waikato” and “catalyst”. It is to do with the Waikato and is about what actually gets things moving in the Waikato. Katolyst is the economic thinktank basically of the Hamilton City Council. One of Graham’s topics was the close relationship that has been built up between the university and its stakeholders. That is an example of what this bill is talking about how this bill will actually work out in the community and the types of things that will happen. Employers will come chamber of commerce members will come and Export Institute people will come and have a closer relationship with the tertiary institutions—with Wintec our local polytech and with the university and other providers—and they will work together. They will provide for the students. 
Let me talk about what the bill does why it does it and how it does it. This bill will ensure better value for the investment by taxpayers and contribute to even better education for students. That is what it will do. It will build on our investment in tertiary education. It changes the system for planning funding and monitoring the provision of tertiary education. It will put national goals and priorities at the centre of the tertiary sector’s focus. As Michael Cullen has said that does not mean completely utilitarian tertiary education that teaches only skills because in order to be a skilful person one also has to be able to reason. People have to know why they are doing what they are doing and its purpose. Having been involved in skills teaching in another life I know that there is research that shows that if people understand why they are doing something then they are better able to do it and they are better able to cope when things do not go exactly according to the book. 
What else will this bill do? It will aim to deliver the right mix of skilled graduates who are needed to transform our economy and to do research that is relevant to businesses industry communities and the country. I know that somebody recently was given a reasonable amount of money to do a PhD on research related to bogans and pop music as far as I can understand it—heavy metal or whatever—and people asked what on earth that has to do with New Zealand. Well those people do not understand that music and appreciation of music at all its various levels is what New Zealand is particularly good at. I was actually saying in the House that day how bizarre that was because I was thinking of how much money the song “How Bizarre” had made for New Zealand. It is interesting that New Zealand does have an international reputation in music and music is an export business. 
The bill also introduces a law to give effect to reforms to make things as has been said by speakers on all sides simpler and more streamlined. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
DIANNE YATES 
: Before the dinner break I was talking about what the bill does and I will now go on to why it does it. So we have done the what; now the why. Largely it is because of policy and the fact that prior to this there was little cooperation across the system. In the 1990s we had a very competitive model. I heard Alan Peachey talking before the break about how he did not like this bill and preferred the competitive model. He suggested that under this bill there would be waste. My goodness what a lot of waste there was under the competitive model! There was lots of repetition lots of small institutions competing against each other and lots of Government money going into the private profits of the institutions that were set up. There was a tremendous amount of waste and a tremendous amount of duplication. I think Mr Peachey needs to take a really good look at what was there before. As we heard from his speech he has come up with no alternatives—just a lot of rhetoric about the system. 
We know that the system became more homogenous we know that the research role of universities was placed at risk we know that competition drove up the cost of providing education and we know that trades and technical training were placed at risk. In fact during question time today we had a discussion about apprenticeships and we know that at least we now have the Modern Apprenticeships scheme which is part of our tertiary system. 
We know that in the 1990s National sought to develop a marketplace in education and that tertiary institutions became competitive. In fact whenever I put my head in a university I heard that the universities were wasting so much energy on competing against each other. Students were told that education was substantially a private not a public good and that research was undertaken to meet private requirements and was not available publicly. Commercialisation and eventual privatisation of tertiary education were the National Party’s agenda. That is why we have these changes. 
One of the changes in this bill that is very very pleasing to someone who remembers that there was such a thing as a quinquennium at universities— 
Darren Hughes 
: A what? 
DIANNE YATES 
: A quinquennium—a 5-year system of funding under the University Grants Committee. This bill brings in a 3-year system rather than a 1-year system so that people— 
Darren Hughes 
: The good old days were good after all. 
DIANNE YATES 
: Yes the good old days were good after all. But now we are going to a 3-year system. That means institutions can plan and are required to plan. That means better recruiting of staff better retention of staff and more certainty for students. So I thank the Minister for Tertiary Education for introducing this bill and introducing greater stability in the system. As I have said earlier the stakeholders will be pleased with that as well especially as they are involved in this planning process. So we thank the Minister for this bill. 
We note that 3-year plans will be put into force and we also note that there will be a greater emphasis on standards and the Government’s priority is to ensure that there are more students at higher levels—diploma level and university level—which will create people who are far more employable and have the skills that many employers are crying out for. 
I totally support this bill. I think it is perhaps long overdue and we look forward to its implementation. I have already praised the University of Waikato for having a stakeholders’ breakfast last week. Our local chamber of commerce had a stakeholders’ breakfast to discuss many of the ideas that are included in this bill. No doubt it will be making submissions and I will be encouraging it to do so. We look forward to the input of those submissions on the bill. I am sure that most of the submissions will be positive and constructively support the bill. Once again I note that we have a bill that sets out to simplify and streamline—those two words can never be bad—the tertiary education system and to bring about tertiary education reforms that will benefit not only students staff the institutions themselves and employers but society as a whole. It is recognition that education is a public good for the benefit of New Zealand.