Lee DeniseDENISE LEE (National—Maungakiekie): Thank you very much Madam Deputy Speaker for the opportunity to speak to this member's bill in Erica Stanford's name. She's put together a very excellent piece of legislation here. I set up a parent-based network in my area before I was elected as a council member and as an MP to counteract the effects of a low-decile school in my area so I know personally the effects of a low-decile ranking and the perception that it has right on the ground.There's an emerging trend in the Government's attitude towards members' bills which we should all be concerned about. They've got a culture of disrespect towards these bills that not only undermines the system of members' bills but actually belittles the issues that they're trying to address. During her first speech of this debate Erica Stanford fantastically gave an outline of how she tried to reach out and start a conversation with the Minister of Education about this bill and it's appalling. It took five weeks for the Minister to respond to her. He ignored her for five weeks and the night before the bill was going to be debated he sent a letter that showed he was clearly too stubborn to consider it on its merits.It seems that Cabinet must be reading from the same dubious playbook because I had a similar experience with my member's bill which would have introduced a framework for women to lodge pay equity claims. I reached out to Minister Lees-Galloway and Minister Genter and I must admit that they did send back a letter in response to me—yes they did. It didn't say much at all and after reading it I was not clear whether they would support it or not. However given I received the letter four weeks after the Government voted against it I think I was able to fill in the gaps. Four weeks after the debate had finished I received this nothing letter from the Minister that only left the impression that they did not care. Is this the standard that we hold our Ministers to: not confronting the issues no constructive discussions only hiding away from making progress for the country?Like my bill this bill is a substantial bill that addresses an important issue. It will have a real impact on families on schools and on children. It's not waffle. It's not a ridiculous bill that would ban music teachers and cooking teachers and dance teachers from calling themselves teachers. The Government was more than happy to support that one. This is a bill that would reprioritise education funding to those children who are most disadvantaged lift their educational achievement and help them get ahead in life. The Minister should have leapt at the chance to support this bill or at the very least engage properly with Erica Stanford to outline his position on it. His Government colleagues Tracey Martin and Chlöe Swarbrick had the integrity and the dignity to do so. Not so for the Minister. What did he do? At the eleventh hour he sent a letter filled with misrepresentations and false assumptions.We heard from the Government during the campaign that this would be a Government for the children and a Government of compassion so it would be fair to question why that side of the House has stood up one after the other and argued in favour of the current decile system which unfairly stigmatises the disadvantaged when—let's face it—they're actually opposed to it. It's so obvious. Why are they opposed to it? It's the deliberate lack of engagement and the refusal to vote for bills that they actually support in principle. And why? It's because they don't want National to get the credit. They don't want to take advantage of the progress that's been handed to you tonight on a member's bill silver platter. Instead you're delaying they're delaying. They're going back to their working groups and waiting for something that they just want to produce themselves and in their own name. The public deserve better. This side of the House will keep trying to deliver for them. I support this bill and I'm very disappointed that the Minister does not.