Parata HekiaHon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education): I just wanted to take the opportunity to answer some common questions that have been raised by the first three speakers and perhaps to clarify the difference between the National Education and Learning Priorities (NELP) and the objectives.First of all the objectives are enduring and NELP provides a medium-term set of priorities that are directed to achieving those objectives. In respect of whether issues of equity or commitment to lifelong learning should be made explicit it is my view that the objectives speak to each of those themes but in different ways. So in terms of equity objective one focuses on helping each child and young person to achieve their educational aspirations and the best of their potential. Objective two already expects the education system to develop in each child their abilities their attributes their social skills to form relationships and to participate in community life and their resilience. Objective four is certainly about kids leaving the system prepared for the world of work which is a very big part of adult life.The question has also been asked by Mr Hipkins and Ms Delahunty and Ms Martin as to why the statement would remain in effect for 5 years. I do not think there is a perfect time line but what we do know is that the current National Administration Guidelines (NAGs) and the National Education Guidelines (NEGs) have no time horizon. They go on and on. We wanted a 5-year period that was not matched to a political cycle. We wanted one that was sufficiently medium term and that responded to the sector's own consistent aspiration for there to be greater predictability certainty and stability in what was being required of them at a high level and that is why the 5 years has been settled upon.Some members have also said: Why doesn't the NELP and why don't the objectives simply follow the curriculum?". The answer there is that the curriculum is separate and distinct and there were actually quite significant concerns that we did not simply appropriate the curriculum into legislation but that we complemented it through the high-level statement. So it is not one or the other; it is how they speak and cross-reference each other to create a context within which the sector operates.There have been concerns about consultation. What is set out in the bill is the minimum—it is the minimum. Members will know that in the articulation of both the NEGs and the NAGs no consultation has been required and it has been up to different Ministers how much might have occurred. But in the Act we are saying that there is a minimum of consultation. In the time that we live in now there is high expectation that consultation will occur and Ms Martin questioned why there was no explicit provision for business for instance. Well we have now established a national cross-sector forum which not only has business present but Pacific Island churches iwi leader forums mayors and police district commanders. The forum meets three to four times a year and then we have 40 regional cross-sector forums so we have put in place actual mechanisms that do require consultation beyond simply education.In terms of preparation of the legislation officials are reflecting over a 2-year period of different kinds of consultation that we have had with the sector and then specifically through November and December of 2015 submissions—there were over 1800 of those—were received from the sector and from the public. Those included submissions from children. Members were concerned about children's voices. Well first of all we did get submissions on those. Second of all every board of trustees is required to have a student voice on it. Thirdly I actively invited all schools to consider running an inquiry approach to studying this legislation and to consider making submissions to the select committee which of course the committee was free to do also."