Mackey Moana: Education Amendment Bill (No 4) — Third Reading 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Mackey Moana: Education Amendment Bill (No 4) — Third Reading 
[Sitting date: 16 August 2011. Volume:675;Page:20931. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 It is nice to see the Government members working so hard to pass legislation that they are so passionate about! Labour will be supporting the Education Amendment Bill (No 4) and we are supportive of most of the provisions within it. Where we become critical is in the broad area of tertiary education and the kind of blinkered view that Government members and Ministers are taking when it comes to this legislation and the impact of other changes they are making in the tertiary education sector. There are clauses in the legislation we will pass this afternoon that may in effect become redundant or out of date within weeks of the legislation being passed.  
Certainly as my colleagues have said we support the establishment of the export education outfit. We think it is a good idea to get standards in that area. Too many organisations have been going overseas and calling themselves the “New Zealand institute” of such and such which carries with it a certain expectation of quality which unfortunately has not been there in many cases. We believe that regulation in this area will be for the benefit of all New Zealanders.  
The only part of this bill really that has been contentious is the setting of student levies. This really does need to be looked at in the broader sense of the funding for the tertiary education sector and the current environment it finds itself in. Although the capping of levies that can be charged to students is a good thing—we absolutely agree with that and we have seen across the country that student levies have shot up—and we want to be able to reduce the cost of tertiary education to our students as much as we can the fact is that we cannot look at that in isolation. We need to look at the reasons why those student levies have increased as dramatically as they have.  
What we know is that because of funding cuts in the tertiary sector tertiary institutions have been cross-subsidising. They have been using the student levy to pay for things such as staffing. Staffing is a core function of any university or polytechnic or any other tertiary institution around the country and they have been paying for staffing out of the student levy. Because they have had their core funding from the Government so constrained—and we heard from the comments of the vice-chancellor of Canterbury University that they have basically been told that funding will go backwards over the next 3 to 5 years under this Government—they have had to look elsewhere in order to fund things that have traditionally come from Government funding. One of those things has been something as core as staffing.  
I remember the first Budget introduced by this National-led Government. One of the first things it did was cut the assistance fund which enabled tertiary institutes to bring experienced academics out to New Zealand to work in our universities to add to their research programme and to add to the quality of teaching. That is something that goes on in every country around the world. Tertiary institutions are constantly involved in a transfer of knowledge and a transfer of the individuals who carry that knowledge. But the reality is that in order to be able to match the salaries that these individuals are able to attract from other countries there needs to be a little bit of assistance. There was a fund there that enabled tertiary institutions to do that and that funding has gone.  
Well tertiary institutions will not want to see their standing in the world go backwards because of this. They naturally look to other areas to supplement their funding for such things as bringing overseas experts into this country to add value to the tertiary education sector in this country. One of the areas that has been looked at is the area of the student levy. Well that is not what the student levy was proposed for and in that respect we support the Minister’s ability to say very clearly what the student levy is for and that students deserve to know what their levy will pay for. They deserve to know how it will be set and they deserve to have input into that process. But that cannot be divorced from the core issue which is a constraining of funding in the tertiary education sector.  
That is why the tertiary institutions have done it. They have not done it because they want to rip students off and they have not done it because they are wasting money. They are doing it because their funding from the Government is going backwards. Government members have not referred to this in any way when they have been speaking. They have looked at this bill in isolation from the reality for our tertiary education sector particularly for universities. On this side of the House we support the provisions in this bill. But one cannot look at it in isolation; this legislation does not exist in a vacuum.  
The idea that National is aspirational for New Zealand is a joke quite frankly if one of the most important sectors in this country will end up going backwards in international rankings because of funding cuts. 
David Bennett 
: Oh rubbish! 
MOANA MACKEY 
: I am interested to see the member from Hamilton guffawing at that. Of course the university in the city he lives in is also not happy about the constrained funding environments under this Government. So he can guffaw all he wants but he knows— 
Dr Ashraf Choudhary 
: Who’s the member? 
MOANA MACKEY 
: I am not sure what his name is but he knows very well what I am talking about. 
The other area in which we cannot look at this legislation in isolation is in relation to the legislation currently being put forward by the ACT Party on voluntary student membership. Currently in most of our universities in New Zealand we have a system where we have compulsory student membership of student associations. The fee is not all that expensive. Membership provides an extraordinary amount of benefit for the fee that is paid.  
For those members of a student association who really strongly object there are conscientious objector provisions in the legislation that they can use if they want to. But the reality is that most students are happy with the services provided by their student association. They know that the services are a lot cheaper than they would be if they had to pay for them outside the student association and they know that the student associations provide their services on a much much more cost-effective basis than if the institutions were providing them or if they had to go out privately.  
I am talking about services like medical services gym services creche food banks hardship tutoring and counselling for students who are undergoing stressful situations. A whole range of services is provided as well as all the clubs on campus and the events run by the student association. As part of that as well they have an elected executive that is involved in the running of the university and in the decisions that are made in that regard.  
So one would have to wonder what is so broke that it needs to be fixed because all it needs is for 10 percent of students to sign a petition to say that they do not like compulsory membership and they want to have a vote on it and the student association could go voluntary. Waikato University which is in Mr Bennett’s city did that. That student association went voluntary and the whole thing fell apart just like student associations did in Australia where 75 percent of student services were lost. The whole thing fell apart. Do members know what? They had to bring it back. They voted to bring it back because voluntary student membership was such a resounding failure. Yet here we are again. The reason that is relevant to this legislation can be found in new section 227A(1)(c) which is to be inserted in the Education Act 1989 by clause 26 of this bill. The new section requires the Minister when he is setting the student levy when he is deciding what it will pay for and when he is deciding how high it will be set where it will be capped and all these things to see that arrangements have been made “for decisions to be made jointly or in consultation with the students enrolled at the institution or their representatives”—or their representatives.  
Well if voluntary student membership goes through the students will not have representatives. So whom will they consult? At the moment it is quite clear. At the moment there is a democratically elected student association executive to consult. Whom will they consult? Will they consult the Young Nats on campus or ACT on Campus?  
Hon Steve Chadwick 
: And they’ll hand-pick them. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: Of course they will—they will hand-pick them. But at the moment we have a system that is not broken that is cost-effective and that works amazingly well providing good-quality services for students at a price they can afford which is often free of charge. We have had cases where universities in New Zealand have gone voluntary and have come back because voluntary membership was such a resounding failure. More important under the legislation there was a clear clear organisation for the university to consult on matters pertaining to students. In new section 227A(1)(c) in clause 26 the Government will be requiring tertiary institutions to consult students yet in their blinkered view Government members who promised not to support voluntary student membership legislation at the last election—breaking that promise— 
Jo Goodhew 
: No we didn’t. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: I tell Jo Goodhew to ask Paul Hutchison. He went to the New Zealand University Students’ Association conference and promised that National would not support this legislation. Well we may be looking at legislation here that will be out of date within weeks if that voluntary student membership legislation goes through and I do not think that that is good lawmaking. Thank you.