Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Flavell Te Ururoa: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:659;Page:8452] 
4.  
TE URUROA FLAVELL (Maori Party—Waiariki) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: : Kei te tautoko a ia i ta Nga Kura-a-Iwi o Aotearoa korero e pa ana ki nga manukanuka mo nga whakamatautau Reo Maori “E he ana te punaha takirua e hoatu nei i te mana orite ki te akonga whai reo Maori ahakoa ko tona reo taketake ko tona reo tuarua ranei tana reo Maori”; ara ka aha ia ki te whakatika i tenei “he kino”? 
[ 
Does she agree with Nga Kura a Iwi o Aotearoa’s concerns about te reo Maori exams that “A double standard prevails one for te reo Maori pathway pupils for whom English is their first language and another for te reo rangatira pathway pupils for whom Maori is their first language”; and what actions will she take to correct what they suggest is a “horrendous wrong”? 
] 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I have seen Mr Bird’s claims which he released on Tuesday and I have asked the New Zealand Qualifications Authority for some advice on the claims that he makes. Until I have this advice it would be premature to comment on the validity of his claims and any actions that would be taken. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: He aha te whakamaherehere kua whiwhi i a ia mai i nga ropu matanga o te reo rangatira pera i a Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Maori mo te whakapae a Nga Kura a-Iwi na te whakamatautau National Certificate of Educational Achievement o Te Reo Maori a New Zealand Qualifications Authority i takahi te mana o Te Reo Maori? 
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
What advice has she received from Te Taura Whiri i te Reo Maori and any other specialist advisers in te reo rangatira about the claims from Nga Kura-a-Iwi that the mana of te reo Maori has been seriously undermined by the New Zealand Qualification Authority’s treatment of National Certificate of Educational Achievement te reo Maori? 
] 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I have not received advice from the Maori Language Commission on this matter. As I have said I have asked the New Zealand Qualifications Authority for some advice on the claims that Mr Bird makes. Until I have this advice it would be premature to comment on the validity of his claims or any actions that would be taken. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. In light of the responses from the Minister the Maori Party has one supplementary question in hand and unfortunately they all go to the same issue in respect of the ability of the Minister to answer the question. I seek leave of the House that one supplementary question be available to us in question time on Tuesday of next week in which to follow up on these issues if that is OK. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to have a supplementary question availability today deferred until next Tuesday. Is there any objection to that course of action? There is objection. 
Te Ururoa Flavell 
: He aha te putake o ta Bali Haque korero kia rua nga momo whakamatautau mo Te Reo Maori. Na mena kei te pera kei te whakaae atu ia ki te whakapae “he nui noa atu te mana” o Te Reo Pakeha ki tera o Te Reo Maori? 
[An interpretation in English was given to the House.] 
[ 
What is the rationale that the New Zealand Qualifications Authority deputy chief executive Bali Haque refers to when justifying the need for two sets of exams and would she not agree that pitching the exams at the “lowest common denominator” in fact devalues the more sophisticated understanding required of students taking up the te reo rangatira pathway? 
] 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: As I said to the member I have asked for some advice and I am sure that that advice will cover the rationale for the current situation. Once I have received that advice I will be very happy to discuss the issue with the member. 
Kelvin Davis 
: Does the Minister agree that a double standard also prevails in that the national standards for Maori immersion schools are not due out until 3 years after the mainstream national standards creating an anomaly and uncertainty for Maori immersion classes in mainstream schools? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: I say to that member that that assertion is not correct. 
Kelvin Davis 
: If over the next 3 years achievement in Maori immersion schools without national standards keeps pace with or exceeds the achievement of mainstream schools that have national standards will the Minister be prepared to concede that national standards were unsuccessful? 
Hon ANNE TOLLEY 
: National standards will be in Maori medium schools from next year. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I accept that the question was hypothetical but hypothetical questions are within the Standing Orders and the answer did not bear any relationship at all to the question asked. For certainty I invite Kelvin Davis to repeat his question. 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The primary question asked about the way in which the New Zealand Qualifications Authority treats Maori language examinations or tests. It has nothing to do in this case with the specific content of the question asked by Kelvin Davis. I think the Minister’s answer has to be reasonable in that circumstance. 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: I accept the point Mr Brownlee makes except that the previous supplementary question asked by Mr Davis did link the primary question with the issue of national standards in Maori medium schools. His second supplementary question following on from the Minister’s earlier answer is a continuation of that line of questioning. I think he has followed a logical order. There was no politics in what he said. He has followed a logical order about the standards in schools and what that means with regard to examinations for Maori students who are taught in te reo. 
Hekia Parata 
: I think you will find Mr Speaker that the second supplementary question asked by the member was prefaced on the possibility that the national standards would not be in place in Maori medium schools. The Minister replied that they would be. Therefore it logically follows that the question should not be answered. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: OK I have allowed considerable contribution by way of point of order because what I was about to rule was challenged. I must say having listened to the points made that I will accept that it was obviously very much questionable whether the supplementary question relates directly to the primary question and given the Minister’s answer that she disputed the assertion in the member’s first question that the standards would not be in place then I guess I cannot expect the Minister to give a precise answer to the second question because she has already disputed the point made in the first supplementary question. On that basis I think I do have to accept that the Minister has responded adequately to the question.