Hipkins Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Hipkins Chris: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 12 December 2012. Volume:686;Page:7466. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
11. 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Does she believe that her consultation process around the possible closure of residential special schools provided all those affected with an opportunity to have a meaningful say and have that say properly considered; if so why? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Yes I do; because the opportunity was offered over several months. That response was given in the form of surveys reports forums hui and fono. I took the opportunity to read all of the submissions that were provided. It was the issues of the availability of coeducational provision at Halswell Residential College and of sufficiency of safety that have resulted in the High Court decision. I do not intend to appeal this decision. To provide certainty for the current pupils and their parents at Salisbury School I can confirm that Salisbury will remain open for 2013. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Did she ask for or receive any advice to contradict the research put forward by the board of Salisbury School showing that girls with intellectual impairment are more vulnerable to sexual abuse in coeducational settings than they are in a single-sex school; if not why did she not ask for that information? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: I did ask for advice from the Ministry of Education and received it. Moreover the research that the member is referring to which is a report by Professor Briggs was not submitted in full to me nor was it submitted as part of the consultation process. In fact the High Court indicated that I could not have taken account of it because it was not submitted. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Why did the Ministry of Education not provide her with that research which was available prior to her decision making if she asked for all of the relevant research and information on this issue? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: I did ask for that advice and I get the advice that is given to me. Now I have asked for the ministry to provide further advice on this important issue because of course safety is paramount in my considerations. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Why should the public have confidence that she executed her decision-making responsibilities appropriately given that Justice Dobson concluded that it was “common sense” that the risk of sexual abuse for girls with impaired intellect was likely to increase that “No great leap in logic is required to recognise the validity of concerns …” and that her arguments amounted to “an abrogation of the responsibilities involved in making a decision”? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: In the first instance it is an existing requirement that no residential home may take on placement in that residential home any child or young person who has a previous sexual history. Secondly I was assured by Halswell that it was making professional and clinical provision. Indeed I think that in an emotional issue as this is it is very unfortunate that Halswell boys their parents and the professional staff there are being impugned because it suits the defence. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The rules about bringing High Court judges into disrepute saying that they are impugning people and criticising this court are quite strict. She is meant— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I did not interpret what the Minister said as doing that. She has not directly criticised a judge at all. The member is correct that she must not do that but I have listened carefully and I do not believe that the Minister did that. A general reference to the approach being taken here as impugning the reputation of people managing that institution I do not think can be interpreted as being a direct criticism of the judge. 
Chris Hipkins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister’s comments can be taken only as criticising the judge or as criticising me. If that reference was directed at me I take offence at it. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! Implied in the member’s questioning has been quite severe criticism of the Minister and for the Minister to—[ 
Interruption 
] Order! For the Minister to imply some criticism in her answer back I do not think is totally unreasonable. For the member to believe that that is offensive to him—at the end of the day if the member has seriously taken offence I obviously must ask the Minister to withdraw her comment. But we have got to be careful. I have sat here today listening to interjections where I have heard members of this House accused of being liars and it just troubles me that members think that they can abuse each other across the House and then get all worked up over something that is far more mild. I just think we have got to be more consistent and more reasonable in the way we respond to situations. If the member having reflected on it has taken serious offence to it then I have got to respect his view but I ask members just to be more reasonable. As I say I have heard today members accused across the House of being liars. I have done nothing about it because I do not want to draw attention to these kinds of things. I just wish that members would be a little more respectful. So I come back to the member. If he has taken serious offence I will—supplementary question Chris Hipkins. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Why did she ignore the advice of Peter Campbell a trustee of Salisbury School and chief executive of a residential facility for young people and adults with intellectual disabilities who advised her in a meeting on 16 October this year that when that facility had operated as a mixed-sex residential facility for a brief period the incidence of abuse increased markedly? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: In that very same meeting the Salisbury School board put forward a proposal for its own provision of coeducational schooling at Salisbury. Moreover we have 29 day special schools in New Zealand. They are all coeducational. We have residential homes for those with disabilities that are run by a number of non-governmental organisations and they are coeducational. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Why should the public have any confidence in her ability to reconsider the matter given that she was presented with clear evidence that the risk of abuse including sexual abuse was likely to increase if she went ahead with the plan to merge single-sex residential schools into a coeducational facility received no evidence to contradict that claim despite asking for it and yet went ahead with the decision anyway? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: Because I hold the providers of residential schools in very high regard. Halswell is staffed by professionals and clinicals and had made it clear what the provision would be: separate accommodation secure systems of security student advocates full awareness of parents and their involvement and influence the availability of individual education plans—all of these were traversed and taken into consideration. So I think that I do show a commitment not only to excellent provision but to how we might expand it to include even more young people into the system. 
Chris Hipkins 
: How does she reconcile that statement that she has just made with the statement of Justice Dobson that it was exactly that line of argument from the Minister that he described as “an abrogation of the responsibilities involved in making a decision” and that she should not place all of the responsibility for those matters on to the school board of trustees? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: My regard for residential schools was supplemented by the advice I received from the Ministry of Education which is responsible for the delivery of special needs to children all around the country. This includes taking into account all of the submissions made by the parents students whanau aiga teachers principals and clinicians. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Does she stand by the statement in her affidavit to the High Court that “If for whatever reason it is no longer possible to close the school effective from 27 January 2013 I am open to considering a different effective date of closure.”; if so what confidence can that community have that she will reconsider her decision with an open mind? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: I do stand by that statement. In fact as I answered in my primary response the board has already been advised that the school will remain open for 2013 that I will meet with the board at the earliest possible opportunity in the new year and that we will together work through what the best outcome will be.