Hide Rodney: Urgent Debates — National Certificate of Educational Achievement—Scholarship Examination 
Hide Rodney: Urgent Debates — National Certificate of Educational Achievement—Scholarship Examination 
[Volume:623;Page:18479] 
RODNEY HIDE (Leader—ACT) 
: 
 I wish to thank the Hon Bill English for first raising this issue. I think that on both sides of the House everyone shares the concern about this debacle. We should point out that it is not just those who sat scholarship who have been affected but all students because this is creating the sense that there is a problem with the exam system and a problem with the standards the Government is putting in front of students. I know that from talking to younger students who are well away from sitting scholarship exams. 
I think that ACT stands up as the only party that was opposed to the introduction of the National Certificate of Educational Achievement (NCEA). We were opposed to it when the National Party first had the bright idea we were certainly opposed to it as it was implemented and we are now looking at it and trying to make the best of a bad deal. 
It follows of course that the Labour Party has put out a whole lot of spin about how this is not a particular problem but I ask members to reflect on what the Labour Party would know about standards. What would the Labour Party know about competition? What would the Labour Party know about excellence? What would the Labour Party know about fairness? 
The latter is something our young people feel most keenly. They actually know about fairness and they can immediately see the unfairness of the NCEA scholarship exam. They know about the unfairness of that. [ 
Interruption 
] 
I know that Trevor Mallard wants to call out divert attention and play politics with young people’s standards but I point this out: if one goes away from an external exam objectively marked and goes into an internal system where people are graded internally I guess it fits that if there is a problem it will go up to Cabinet and Cabinet members will say: “Oh we’re not happy with those results.” As Mr Donnelly pointed out they will then take a bit of bronze paint it up gold and call it “a distinction certificate”. 
Who decided to do that? Was it the markers? Was it the examiners? Was it the teachers? No it was Cabinet. Cabinet awarded 373 distinction certificates to try to paper over its cock-up. 
Anyone can see that when there is an exam and 641 biology students sit the exam and nine get it and across the way there is an English exam— 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It is a matter of whether the term the member just used is a prescribed term. I do not really want to repeat it but it is a male bird of a particular type that I think has been ruled out before. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Clem Simich) 
: To make me aware of the term sadly the member would have to repeat it—[ 
Interruption 
] The member will be aware of the word he might have used; if so he will withdraw it please. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: I withdraw. It was a total bungle that the Government oversaw and I am really just relaying to the House the way that students see it. 
The point is this—and I know Mr Mallard wants to break it up—we had 641 biology students and only nine got scholarships. Over in the English exam one in three students succeeded. Any fool can see that there is a huge discrepancy in that. We know that any fool can see that because even this Government understood there was a problem. 
What did it do? It ran back to Cabinet to ask what it could do to make up for that and it came up with a whole new award—in Cabinet. So who would get scholarships—no actually they do not get scholarships; they get something else—was decided whilst Ministers were sitting around the Cabinet table. Members should ask themselves what sort of integrity a system like that has. 
Then Government Ministers sat around the Cabinet table and decided how much money each of those students would get. They decided that an extra 64 students would get some money. Where was that decided? It was decided around the Cabinet table too. Then the Government had the audacity to give itself a pat on the back for being so generous. It reminds one of the cricket match where Helen Clark suggested she was quite generous—because every time someone hit a six the Government gave away another $6000—but that was not true either. 
The effect of that decision is not just on the students who sat those exams. It brings into question all exams in New Zealand and not in relation to just this problem. If we cannot manage a system for the brightest and best to have confidence in how can we manage a system for everyone? We should give schools and parents a choice about what system they want. Right now if that were done there would not be too many going for NCEA. 
I ask Government members especially Mr Mallard and Mr Benson-Pope to think of those students who have missed out those students who have a certificate of distinction and those students who have sat scholarship exams. They have worked hard set their sights high aimed for excellence—and this Government has let them down. So cynical is this Government that it has not apologised or even fingered anyone responsible. It has said that the issue is due to transition and teething problems. It is typical of this Government that it is no one’s fault. 
The Government’s response was to put out some positive spin come up with a new generous reward called a certificate of distinction throw a bit of money around and try to paper over the problem. How can students have any confidence in this system and how can New Zealanders have any confidence in this Government?