Peachey Allan: Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Peachey Allan: Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:644;Page:13678] 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
: 
 I appreciate the opportunity to express the opposition of the National Party to the passage of the Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill. I have been sitting here thinking about what sort of contextual framework this bill needs to be put in. It has not been lost on me that just half an hour ago I was speaking against the Electoral Finance Bill and talking about the defence of democracy in New Zealand. Now just half an hour or so later speaking on this bill something is right at the forefront of my mind and it is this. Just as a socialist Government is seeking to control the democratic processes of this country and is using its numbers in this House to drive through legislation so we have this same Government that clearly understands one thing. One of the features of all socialist society is that control of the vitally important educational establishment is paramount. This bit of legislation seeks to extend that control—Government control—over the lives of New Zealanders and our institutions. 
It should not be lost on New Zealanders listening to the debate this afternoon and watching it on television that when the Associate Minister got up and spoke the words that rolled off her tongue were “plan” and “monitor”. It took me back to the Committee stage when the Associate Minister—new as she was to her role then—was in the chair and every second word was “plan” “plan”. Then the word “commissariat” was thrown into the conversation. What great socialist terms they are: “commissariat” and “control”. When those members have their private meetings and caucuses and they are talking about this sort of stuff I wonder whether they call each other comrade and refer to themselves as the commissariat of New Zealand—not the Labour Party but the commissariat of New Zealand. 
We need to reflect very very carefully about what some of the most intelligent well-educated people in New Zealand—the vice-chancellors of the universities—had to say to the Education and Science Committee about this proposed legislation. The Minister in her speech made a lot of the role of the Tertiary Education Commission. It seems to me that where the Government wants control plan control and plan we should really be trying to create the environment in which the tertiary education sector—in particular the universities—can actually achieve the best for New Zealand. When I look at this legislation— 
Hon Maryan Street 
: Ah! 
ALLAN PEACHEY 
: Oh the Associate Minister can sigh but National knows that in 12 months’ time we are going to be cleaning this mess up. When one thinks about the message that the vice-chancellors gave us about academic freedom and about the autonomy of their institutions one needs to ask oneself a couple of questions. Whatever happened to the days when tertiary education in this country was run by half a dozen men and women meeting occasionally around the table in Wellington? Now we have multimillion dollar bureaucracies. How does this legislation this massive expansion of bureaucracy and the environment of control plans commissars and commissariats produce the world-class universities that New Zealand will need if it is to survive as a prosperous modern market economy in the world? How will this bureaucracy and these plans produce that? It will not. The reason it will not is that the Government is so obsessed with control that it does not understand how one creates environments to get the best out of people. 
The other question I have is how this massive expansion of bureaucracy and control will produce the higher quality research-led teaching that our students need if they are going to be competitive in the world. It seems to me that they should be the two significant objectives of any legislation on tertiary education in this country. Not about control—[ 
Interruption 
] Can I just say to those members opposite that if the Leader of the House wanted to come in and hear what I had to say he would have been here to hear it. He actually does not need that member to give him a garbled version so I suggest that member just reflect and think about some of the things I am saying. The great challenge in tertiary education in New Zealand is not how it is controlled—not which Government can create the biggest bureaucracy expand the Tertiary Education Commission the most and cut back on the ability of universities and polytechs to make good decisions—it is the interface between the economic development of this country the quality of its social fabric research and development and learning. I do not see anything in this legislation that pulls all those things together and in any way lets us see ahead. 
What I see in this legislation is an attempt by a Minister to clean up a mess foisted on this country by a previous Minister. It has to be of concern to New Zealanders that twice in 8 years this House is debating and passing this sort of legislation. This Government did not get it right the first time. If New Zealanders reflect back to the environment of 2000-01 when the Government thought it knew everything and off it went and rushed into it they will see we now have to clean it up. The tragedy is that this is not a clean-up; this is an extension of Government control where Government control is not needed because nothing in this legislation strengthens the autonomy of our universities. Nothing in this legislation protects and extends academic freedom. It is about plan and control. It does not address the issues of the interface between research-led teaching and the economic development of this country. 
Like so much socialist legislation that has been passed in this country this bill when it is passed will have an unintended consequence. Universities beginning with Auckland are saying that as a result of this legislation open entry will come to an end. Now I am one of those people who happens to believe that New Zealand needs an outstanding restricted entry world-class university that attracts the best intellectuals in the world to this country. I do not think it was the Government’s intention to create an environment in which entry to university will be closed off. It is interesting is it not that those Government members opposite may be responsible for creating an environment in which New Zealanders lose free entry to university. That stigma will stay with the Government for a long time.