King Colin: Education Amendment Bill — First Reading 
King Colin: Education Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:653;Page:2663] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to take a call on the Education Amendment Bill. The members of the Education and Science Committee are certainly enthusiastic about this bill being sent to us if that is what is intended and come 10 o’clock tomorrow morning we will get serious about working as a team and working through the legislation presented to us so that we can get it back to the House by 28 August as the Minister has requested. We will ensure that it is a bill that will fit into the very context of the Education Act 1989 and support it. 
I make the point that in any relationship situation things can get a bit stormy as they did in the Chamber before dinner time after the debate had ended on a bill that the House agreed on just about unanimously. It had to do with trade and there is a lot of agreement around trade. But when it comes to education it is quite clear that things become very very political. The Opposition spokesperson on education attempted to ask where the transitioning part of this bill is. I tell the Labour spokesperson on education to take some time because the National Government has a lot more to come under the umbrella of education as far transitioning is concerned. 
But what we are concerned about first and foremost is to make schools more workable more efficient and more forward-thinking so that they focus on those children who do not achieve the level of literacy and numeracy that we know they need to have in order to be self-sufficient by the time they leave school. It is on that basis that this bill has come to the House. The bill deals with some matters that may be considered to be small in comparison with some other matters but they are all very important. We have to remember that the Education Act 1989 is now 20 years old and when we look through it we see that a large proportion of it has been repealed and replaced by various amendments. 
I want to go back to another point that was raised that appears to me to be the most controversial issue which is the police vetting. We are not debating whether people should have access to children without having been vetted by the police; we are debating whether those people who do not have unsupervised access to children should be vetted by the police. Effectively the bill proposes that those who do not have unsupervised access to children do not need police vetting. 
That proposal received unanimous support from the education trade. I am quoting from the  
New Zealand Education Review 
 magazine which said: “… principals and unions are welcoming National’s decision to allow parents and volunteers who have not passed police checks to have unsupervised access to children in schools and early childhood centres.” Principals and the unions are supporting that. It is interesting to read what the president of the Principals Federation Ernie Buutveld had to say. He said that overturning police vetting for volunteers and parents was a “step in the right direction” and schools would continue to follow policies to ensure student safety. That is an exact quote from Ernie. Further to that the president of the New Zealand Educational Institute is reported as describing the move by Anne Tolley the Minister of Education as common sense. She said the vetting of parents would lead to a drop in parent volunteering. I think myself that this bill has come forward as a result of listening clearly to the sector. 
We have heard of about seven cases of people who raised concerns with regard to criminal records over the last 2 years. There were 35000 people vetted and seven people were found to have criminal records. I draw the House’s attention to the fact that when I first became a member of the Education and Science Committee a member’s bill came before us about ensuring that all people who stand for election to a board of trustees should be police vetted. We looked at that and wrestled with it. We sent the officials away to consider it and they came back. There was something inside us that said we had to do that. But we could not; we could not achieve it. I also take the point from my reading around this situation that it has not been possible under the present regime to ensure 100 percent compliance with the requirement for police vetting. I call on members of the select committee to step past the theatre of the House on the first reading of the bill and to see whether we can put children and their achievements at the very centre. We should be focused on them and on their achievements. 
One thing that really excited me too was the thought of the flexible model around school governance which is something that has stirred my interest from early times in politics. I recall that the late Hon Brian Donnelly did a superb paper that dealt with these aspects. He also dealt with the subject of one principal looking after a number of smaller schools so that there was the strong collegial leadership that was needed. I always found that Brian Donnelly as the chair of the Education and Science Committee brought a maturity to that committee and it has continued under Allan Peachey. We are under good direction and a good chair and I believe that what this bill has to offer is very very positive. 
It would be a shame to get bogged down in ideology whereby we felt that we needed to be prescriptive as to the word and the sentence of what a board of trustees must do. My experience with boards of trustees is that professional development is always offered—the ministry is close by—and they have a passion that needs not to be fettered by regulations that will dumb them down. 
A point that I would like to take up just to conclude concerns student allowances which have not been touched on. It is not a biggie but it is something that needs to be focused on. At present it is unlawful to make a false declaration but this bill makes that an action that makes someone liable to a fine. I think that might be quite appropriate because it does not send a very good signal if people are able to drive a bus through the regulations of a significant Act—the Education Act 1989. 
On that basis I think everything looks very good. I know that the Government members of the select committee are very very enthusiastic to get this bill before the committee in order to make sure we can deliver it back to the House on 28 August so that we can start proceeding down the pathway towards helping every child to realise his or her potential. Thank you Mr Assistant Speaker.