Davis Kelvin: Education Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Davis Kelvin: Education Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:661;Page:9649] 
KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) 
: 
 I will start off where my colleague Trevor Mallard finished by saying that I do not think the Education Amendment Bill will do anything to raise achievement. What we are looking at here are things that are outside the classroom such as police vetting of contractors and the registration of teachers. When we talk about education we need to talk about what raises achievement and we need to focus on the end of the spectrum that concerns the interaction between the teacher and the student. If we are to make a difference in terms of raising achievement if we are to make a difference to education in New Zealand we need to be talking about the interaction between teachers and children because that is the point where learning occurs. 
I support the amendment relating to the police-vetting system. When I was a principal if I needed a staff member vetted I would send off an application form to the Teachers Council which would send it to the police. This amendment takes out the middle person so that the vetting form goes straight to the police and back to the school. That is a sensible idea. It does not in any way change the workload of the people in the school because the vetting form still needs to be filled out folded put in a stamped envelope and posted off. I was lucky enough to have an administration officer who did that work for me. Not all schools have that; it often comes down to the principal having to do that sort of menial work for want of a better description. This amendment will not actually decrease the workload of people in schools but it does streamline the system and I have no problems with that. 
I do have problems though with people working inside schools not being police vetted even if they are working outside normal school hours. Most people say those hours are 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. and teachers do not disagree with that entirely. In respect of contractors such as cleaners not being police vetted I have told the House about the experience I had up north where 100 upstanding members of the community were identified as mentors by a social worker. That social worker was going to get those 100 people to mentor 100 kids. As an afterthought she thought she had better get those people police-vetted to see whether they had a criminal record. She was expecting maybe three four or half a dozen people to have criminal records but she found that 78 of those 100 possible mentors actually had criminal records for violence. Those 78 people out of 100 could be cleaners in schools or could apply for cleaning jobs in schools. We do not know whether people have criminal records just by looking at them. I think we really need to be careful that we ensure the safety of kids by making sure that anybody who works at a school is vetted by the police. 
I agree with Trevor Mallard about the removal of the part of the bill that states that bodies corporate can take over the role of commissioners or limited statutory managers. I think that if a commissioner or a limited statutory manager comes in we need to have someone with whom the buck stops. It would be very difficult to say that the buck stops with a group of people who may change over time; they may be voted off move on go into retirement or whatever. There is a lack of stability in terms of the people who are commissioners or limited statutory managers. So I think it is a good move that that part of the bill was taken out. 
I was a bit concerned though that the parts of Labour’s Education Amendment Bill (No 3) that made really good sense have not been included in this bill. In particular I refer to the part that required principals to ensure that their schools provided advice and guidance on career choices and pathways. I think that is a really important aspect of schooling and it needs to be offered to students from an early age. Kids should at least be made to think about what they are going to do in life. That will influence their subject choice as they go through the schooling system. It is really easy for that to occur in schools in that it is easy for teachers to include in any subject or study they are doing—for example a beach study—a bit of discussion or talk about career options that relate to the study. In respect of the beach they could talk about being a commercial fisherman a Department of Conservation worker a tourism operator—because there are many opportunities for careers in tourism to do with the beach—or a fisheries officer. There is a lot that could be done and I think it was silly not to expressly state that in the bill because kids need to have all the options from a very early age. It is very simple for teachers to include that sort of information in any study that they are doing. 
It was also explicit in Labour’s Education Amendment Bill (No 3) that the performance of principals be managed and monitored by their board of trustees. That measure should also be part of this bill. I think it is really important that principals are held to account by their boards of trustees. After all the boards of trustees represent their community. It should also be made explicit that teachers’ performance should be monitored and goals should be set. Not including those provisions undermines the Government’s aim of having the highest possible standards in education. 
Another part that has not been included in this amendment bill is the provision ensuring the enrolment at school of all persons entitled to be enrolled. It makes a mockery of the issue of truancy if 30000 students are truant every day but it is not explicit in legislation that the principal is to ensure that they are enrolled. Supposedly an army of kids do not turn up to school each day but if it is not explicit that the school has to enrol all persons entitled to be enrolled that makes a nonsense of the issue of truancy. We have to make sure that all kids are at school if they are meant to be at school. 
Actively managing and reporting on a school’s performance and the aims and objectives set out in the school charter is something else that has not been included. Labour’s Education Amendment Bill (No 3) included that provision but it is not explicit in this bill. The school charter is an agreement between the school the community and the Government as to the school’s aims and objectives. It is really important that those aims and objectives are reported to the community in an open manner so that the community can hold the school to account. It is quite interesting that a number of people live under the misconception that schools are not actually held to account but they are held to account every day by their community. Teachers are held to account by principals and by boards of trustees. It should be kept that way and that should be explicit in this bill. 
Clause 15 of the Education Amendment Bill amends section 35A. It provides that private schools are treated the same as other schools. I go back to what I was saying last night: it would be really cool if State schools were treated the same as private schools in that State schools could choose whether to implement national standards. With that thank you.