Education Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Education Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:663;Page:10889] 
Education Amendment Bill 
Third Reading 
Debate resumed from 6 May. 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I will certainly take up the residual part of my speaking time on the third reading of the Education Amendment Bill. If I remember correctly when I was interrupted by the dinner hour on the last sitting day this bill was on the Order Paper I wanted to talk about two things that were in the bill and one that was not. Labour is supporting this bill. We support information matching between the Ministry of Education and the New Zealand Teachers Council and we do that for a number of reasons. 
First there is the distinct possibility that teachers who have been deregistered have not come to the attention of employing authorities that may be looking to appoint teachers to teaching positions. That information sharing between the register of teachers and the Ministry of Education allows the Teachers Council in regard to people employed in teaching positions to identify the person’s employer and also the person’s registration status which is an essential item for the protection of the quality of teaching in our schools. In addition to that there is a more pedestrian purpose to that matching of information—one that is no less valid—which is the ability of the ministry to identify through that information sharing the accurate and appropriate salary entitlements and eligibility to any allowances to which teachers might be entitled. So we support that information matching and see it on both levels—firstly as a very clear indicator of the quality assurance of staff teaching our children in schools and secondly as I say as a more pedestrian matter but one that is none the less important to teachers in receipt of salary entitlements. 
The second point which is important and which Labour supports entirely concerns the changes that the Education and Science Committee has made to the process around police vetting of all those who have access to students in teaching establishments. The select committee saw fit to shorten the time frame for the police vetting process; I think there is a suitable level of urgency to that as reflected in where the select committee got to. I pay tribute to the chair of the Education and Science Committee and to those who worked on this bill for progressing it to this stage with a useful amendment such as that. 
The one thing I am disappointed about however and I remain disappointed about it is that the National members on the select committee—and indeed the Minister—saw fit not to accept some proposed amendments from Labour members. The amendments arose out of our Education Amendment Bill (No 3) which was in train prior to the last election. One of those amendments was to make it explicit for principals to ensure that their schools provided guidance and career counselling in schools. That is an example of where in fact it would be entirely possible to join the dots of the compulsory education sector with those of the tertiary education sector when the Government is looking to make it harder for students to enter tertiary institutions harder to stay there and harder to access support mechanisms like student loans and allowances in order for them to succeed in tertiary institutions. 
One of the cries that go up constantly is that the young people arriving in our tertiary institutions are not sufficiently prepared and not adequately prepared to make suitable and appropriate decisions about their tertiary study. How can they make appropriate decisions about their tertiary study and have more chance of succeeding in a chosen discipline or degree programme if they are not equipped earlier than that with suitable career-choice advice and career guidance? To make it optional for schools to have guidance counsellors—and that is another whole area in itself—and career counsellors is to deny that these things ought to be joined up. It is in fact to deny a common-sense thing that is provided at low cost through our secondary schools and that can equip our young people in particular to succeed or to do better in their chosen tertiary course of study. It is a shame that that is not included in this final legislation. It is something that would not have caused any major problem. It would be something that the schools that are already doing it could continue to do. The fact that it is not being made explicit in the bill that principals should ensure guidance and counselling on career choices and career pathways is a point of neglect. It is a shame that that has not been included in this legislation. 
The Education Amendment Bill that we are debating for its third reading today makes some significant advances not only in the quality of education but also in the protection of students within the education system. It is a shame. It is short-sighted. It is unnecessarily partisan of the Government not to include the Labour amendments that would have seen career counselling made mandatory and that would have seen an insistence on that counselling being there in the school curriculum. We will never get the kind of quantum leap we need in this economy if we are not preparing our young people through the pipeline of the education system to make appropriate and successful tertiary education and career choices for themselves. Whether or not young people go on to university or a polytechnic into an apprenticeship or some form of trades training or into some other appropriate avenue for further education they should have access at every point in their high school and compulsory education sector training to that kind of advice. It is a matter of regret that that provision is not in this final legislation. Thank you. 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It is a pleasure to speak during the third reading of the Education Amendment Bill. The education system in the 21st century certainly needs to be dynamic and flexible and the bill will go some way to ensuring that it will be through these changes. The bill itself does that in a number of ways. Firstly it adapts the police-vetting system to require vetting of the non-teaching staff employed at schools who may have unsupervised access to children during school hours. Secondly the bill introduces information sharing between the Ministry of Education and the Teachers Council which will finally close off a loophole for unregistered teachers. 
With regard to the police vetting of non-teaching staff the legislation also makes mandatory the police vetting of anyone 17 years or over in a home-schooling situation. In fact those requirements for police vetting will apply to early childhood education centres primary schools intermediate schools and secondary schools. Additionally those police vets will be required to be initiated by the management team or board of trustees depending on the school type and will be required to be conducted within 4 weeks of this bill becoming law. After that in any future case they will be required no later than 2 weeks after non-teaching staff likely to have unsupervised access to children start work. 
This Government takes education seriously and in doing so has set educational achievement as our children’s No. 1 priority and as the No. 1 priority for the country. That being the case we recognise the importance of a first-class education system and first-class conditions for our children and our teaching staff. In conclusion I make the point that such a priority really does highlight the importance of a policy such as national standards to improve our children’s education literacy and numeracy. It is important that we place that as a touchstone for the quality of our education. Education is a powerful force; it transforms people’s lives for the greater good. On that basis I commend this bill to the House. 
KELVIN DAVIS (Labour) 
: 
 The Labour Party supports the Education Amendment Bill although I do have grave reservations not so much about what it actually contains but about what is omitted from it. The bill has four main purposes and I will go through them. 
First it introduces information matching between the New Zealand Teachers Council and the Ministry of Education in order to identify individuals without registration teaching in schools. Secondly it removes the requirement for all contractors to be police vetted and replaces it with the requirement to police vet only those contractors that have or are likely to have unsupervised access to children at schools and in early childhood education services. Thirdly it proposes that the New Zealand Teachers Council no longer provide a police-vetting service and that schools and early childhood education services can apply directly to the New Zealand Police. Fourthly it proposes that the initial maximum 3-month suspension of a teacher’s practising certificate or authority to teach will be amended so that the suspension can be reviewed after 3 months and extended for a further 3 months. 
My concerns about this bill are not so much about the four purposes but about the fact that when I think through those four purposes I ask myself which one of them will bring about a quantum leap a step change or any sort of effect on the core purpose of our education system which is to raise achievement. Not one single purpose in the bill will bring about a quantum leap or step change in raising educational achievement. Perhaps the first purpose which relates to introducing information matching between the New Zealand Teachers Council and the Ministry of Education to identify individuals without registration teaching in schools may have some impact on raising achievement in that it is important that all teachers in schools are registered. When teachers are registered it means that they have been to teachers college and we can expect that they would have a certain competency. But other than that this bill does not address that which will have the greatest impact on raising achievement which is the core purpose of our education system and that is the calibre of the teachers in our schools. 
I have spoken about the calibre of teachers at length in the House time and again. If we have a continuum of those issues and strategies that will have the most impact on raising achievement and those strategies that have the least impact on raising achievement these four purposes in this bill will be at the lower end of that continuum because none of them addresses the ability of the teacher. The interface between teachers and students is when learning occurs. Even if we were to buy into the Government’s argument that the policy on national standards was the most important policy it had that would have the greatest impact on achievement we would expect that the next legislation the Government brought through would contain the second-greatest impact on raising achievement. Quite frankly none of these purposes will have as much impact as that on raising achievement. For example purpose No. 3 which removes the requirement for all contractors to be police vetted and replaces it with a requirement to police vet only those contractors who have or are likely to have unsupervised access to children at schools and early childhood services is basically saying that the sparky who goes down to the back prefab to fix a light switch does not have to have a police vet. I have to ask this House what impact the sparky fixing a light switch down in the back prefab or the resource room down the back of a school would have on raising achievement. I do not know; it simply has no impact. 
We have spent countless hours in the House on this bill; we are on its third reading and we have been through the Committee stage. We have spent all this time on a bill that will not impact significantly on the core purpose of our education system which is raising achievement. If we were to look at those issues or policies that would have an impact on raising achievement and improving the ability of teachers we should be discussing issues such as the quality and calibre of those people whom we select to go into teachers college in the first place. We should make sure that we have minimum criteria for teacher trainees. Not only that we should also be debating the quality and standard of teacher training. 
I have been down to Christchurch where I have observed the Graduate School of Education. From what I know from my experience as a principal and teacher its training programmes are absolutely superb and we should be making sure that what the Graduate School of Education is doing is replicated throughout all teachers colleges in New Zealand. I was told when I visited the college that when it set itself up it fully expected that within 5 years it would be redundant because every teachers college and college of education would replicate the programmes it takes its teacher trainees through. Instead of its programmes being replicated and copied they have basically been marginalised and sidelined. That is a crying shame because the programmes provided by the Graduate School of Education in Christchurch are first-class. 
The next thing we need to do is ensure that the professional development teachers have once they have finished teachers college and they are out in schools is also first-class and that it follows on from the training that goes on at the Graduate School of Education which uses research-based best practice teaching— 
Louise Upston 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This is the third reading of the bill and I should have thought that the member should be addressing the bill itself. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Hon Rick Barker) 
: I believe that the member was addressing the bill. The third reading debate is a reasonably wide-ranging debate summing things up. The member was not straying widely of the bill extensively. I invite the member to continue. 
KELVIN DAVIS 
: We should be addressing what will raise achievement at the fastest rate in our New Zealand schools. I have spoken about the four main purposes of this bill and said that they will not raise achievement as fast as that. They will have a minimal impact on achievement. 
I remind the House that we need to concentrate and focus on those issues that will raise achievement. We can talk about the police vetting of teachers until the wee hours of the morning but that will not mean that one child will get the National Certificate of Educational Achievement or pass a national standard. All it means is that we are talking in circles and avoiding the real issues about what will make the biggest difference in New Zealand education. I should have thought that members opposite would want to address the issues related to raising achievement. We know that when children achieve as well as or as highly as they can and their potential is met they can then move on to university or business or become entrepreneurs. They can use their skills to further our country. I think this House should be debating those issues that will have the greatest impact on achievement so that students can go on out into the world and contribute significantly to our country—to the economy and to everything that will make New Zealand a great country. 
The Labour Party is supporting this bill. Nothing in its four main purposes will significantly harm the educational system; they just will not make much of an impact. Whether we police vet contractors or whether we have direct links for principals to apply to the police rather than going through the Teachers Council for police vetting none of those things will make any difference or have any impact whatsoever on the achievement of children in New Zealand schools. As I said if we believe what the National Government has said about the national standards policy being the best thing since sliced bread that it will raise achievement and have that step change for New Zealand education then we would expect that the next education bill off the block would be the second most important bill to raise achievement. Quite frankly this bill does not do that. Thank you very much. 
LOUISE UPSTON (National—Taupo) 
: 
 I am delighted to stand as the final speaker in the third reading of the Education Amendment Bill. Education is my top personal priority. For this National Government lifting achievement in schools and building opportunities for every young New Zealander is vital to growing our nation. There are a couple of ways in which this bill does that. Firstly it is focusing our funding on the front line reducing red tape and lifting achievement. Kelvin Davis the member who spoke before me did not think that children’s safety in schools is a priority. I think that if a child is unsafe at school because of a contractor not having had a police vet it is a major barrier to that child’s learning. I will not stand here and tolerate unsafe school environments. 
This bill is about improving efficiency in the schooling system reducing compliance costs for schools and early childhood education centres and improving the quality and effectiveness of education legislation. Labour Opposition members have talked at length about what they would have liked to see in the bill. Well this is a Government bill. This is not the Labour Opposition’s bill. That is why we have talked about what we believe is important: putting the focus on the front line which is students and their learning and reducing red tape. 
Unfortunately one Opposition member in particular filibustered for quite some time in the bill’s second reading. He went on and on about the changes that he would have liked to see happen but two former Ministers of Education in his Government did not make these changes happen. Well I place priority on children’s safety whether it is in a school environment or in a home-based early childhood education centre which this law also extends protection to. That is why without any unnecessary delay I am thrilled to support this bill. This Government understands the importance of education and makes it a priority. Thank you. 
A party vote was called for on the question  
That the Education Amendment Bill be now read a third time. 
Ayes 113 
New Zealand National 58; New Zealand Labour 43; ACT New Zealand 5; Maori Party 5; Progressive 1; United Future 1. 
Noes 9 
Green Party 9. 
Bill read a third time.