Moroney Sue: Education (National Standards) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
Moroney Sue: Education (National Standards) Amendment Bill — In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:651;Page:631] 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 When I spoke on Part 1 of the Education (National Standards) Amendment Bill last evening I lamented the fact that there was no opportunity for the general public to come to talk to Parliament about their views on these very very important issues. This is even more so in Part 2. 
There would be a lot to be gained from the Education and Science Committee hearing from people as to how they want to see these national standards put in place. What type of national standards would they be? What would they look like? What must we try to avoid? There are some things that we know we must try to avoid. We have evidence-based research from overseas that shows us exactly what we must avoid. We must avoid national testing in the way that it drives teachers to teach to a test and therefore does not allow them to use their creativity to address individual children’s needs. I am pleased to say that there is a Supplementary Order Paper that may help to ease the general public’s concerns about their lack of consultation on this bill and the legislative process to date and I want to speak in favour of this Supplementary Order Paper put forward in the name of the Hon Chris Carter. 
The purpose of the Supplementary Order Paper is to ensure consultation with the public before the Minister can publish by a notice in the  
Gazette 
 any national standards. I think that is a basic minimum requirement. I would be very very concerned if the Minister was to not support this amendment. If the National Party is not supporting this amendment then I think the intention is very clear: the Minister who has a lot of power and not very much knowledge about these issues has absolute carte blanche to go ahead and decide what these national standards will be. That could very easily turn into national testing. 
David Bennett 
: What do you know? 
SUE MORONEY 
: I am not arrogant enough to believe that I am the person with all the wisdom on this issue unlike the Minister who has rushed this legislation through the House has not asked for public submissions and has not allowed the opportunity for ordinary people like me—just parents—who might like to have a say about what the education standards might look like for my children and for other people’s children as well. We have not been able to have that opportunity so I want to speak in support of that Supplementary Order Paper and the associated Supplementary Order Paper from the Hon Chris Carter. 
The second Supplementary Order Paper will provide for greater scrutiny of national standards and the ability for them to be reviewed by treating them as regulations. I think that is a very important power a very important amendment that this House needs to consider very carefully. What if the national standards are gazetted by the Minister and they are not quite right? What would be the redress? What would be the recourse? How would we review that? 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Why should it be any different from the curriculum? 
SUE MORONEY 
: I say to Dr Smith that I look forward to him voting in favour of this amendment. If he believes there should be a review that there should be proper processes around this then I invite him to support the Minister’s amendment because I think it is an excellent one. I would be very very worried indeed—I think it would be a very worrying signal to the New Zealand public—if National Party members could not find it in their hearts to support these two amendments. These are the safeguarding amendments to make sure that even though we have not had a democratic process for this particularly important bill there is at least some ability for the public to have some say over what those national standards may look like and then to come back and revisit them and see whether they have worked and be able to review them. I think that is a very important part of any robust legislative process—not that this has started very well at all. It has not been robust from the start because we have not had a select committee process. 
I want to take the opportunity also to talk about a few other parties’ positions. I find it very interesting that the ACT Party the party of freedom of choice is supporting a bill that potentially forces everyone down the same pathway. They are national standards. Where is the freedom of choice argument from the ACT Party on this issue? Forcing children to go to school for goodness’ sake under Part 1! Where is the freedom of choice in that? I find the ACT Party’s position very interesting. I turn to the Maori Party’s position on national standards. Yesterday I listened very carefully to Dr Pita Sharples. He was very interesting. He talked about how mainstreaming does not work necessarily for Maori. I agree with him but forcing national standards that only the Minister will have the right to have a say on—what will that do for Maori children?