Dalziel Lianne: Urgent Debates — Schools Canterbury—Proposed Closures and Mergers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Dalziel Lianne: Urgent Debates — Schools Canterbury—Proposed Closures and Mergers 
[Sitting date: 18 September 2012. Volume:684;Page:5284. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL (Labour—Christchurch East) 
: 
 I actually do not accept that it is good enough for the Minister of Education to cancel a conference that she was due to attend tonight— 
Hon Hekia Parata 
: I didn’t cancel. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: She was supposed to be at the conference tonight— 
Hon Hekia Parata 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. It was not my conference and therefore it was not in my— 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: No that is not a point of order. That is a debating point. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: It is not good enough that this Minister cancelled out of a conference that she was due to speak at tonight as part of the opening of that conference and stand here in this House and not even complete the 15 minutes that has been allocated to her to defend the Government’s announcements last week. I want to tell her that the devastation that she has wrought on the people whom I have the privilege to represent— 
Hon Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You may well have ruled that the previous point raised by my colleague was a debating point but I do think it worth noting that the Speaker signalled as strongly as he could last Thursday afternoon that this debate would take place. Anyone who thinks it is a snap debate clearly was not listening at the time. I think the Minister has shown the House appropriate courtesy by being here. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Thank you for your explanation Mr Brownlee. That too is debatable. 
Hon Clayton Cosgrove 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The Minister was uninterrupted in her speech for her 13½ minutes. This member has been interrupted twice—twice—with spurious points that are not points of order. I would invite you to rein them in. 
The ASSISTANT SPEAKER (H V Ross Robertson) 
: I have ruled on them. Thank you. 
Hon LIANNE DALZIEL 
: I do not believe that it is good enough to stand in this House and not acknowledge the impact that this announcement—without warning without preparation to communities—has heaped upon those people who are suffering down there as a result of the earthquake. In fact what I really heard the Minister say was that this has given her an incredible opportunity—that is what the earthquake has given the Government—to do things that it would not otherwise be able to do. At the launch we were told by the Government that Christchurch could be the exemplar for the rest of New Zealand. 
I want to put this on the record. The Government said that Christchurch would be the exemplar for the rest of New Zealand. I believe that the rest of New Zealand needs to hear what is going on in Christchurch. They have to see this not as a Christchurch issue but as a Government issue where it is imposing its will on the people of Christchurch in order to pilot the work that it wants to do in the rest of the country. This is not about just Christchurch; this is coming to a school near you. Every single New Zealander needs to be aware of this. 
I have to say that this is the message that is coming back from on the ground in Christchurch at the moment as people reel from the impact of that announcement. Nothing prepared these communities for what they heard last Thursday. 
The pre-breakfast cross-party forum from the Minister did nothing to prepare MPs for what was to be announced that afternoon. Certainly we were told about the clusters. We were certainly told about shared site provision. In some instances we were told that there would be some closures. But when we were told that no thought whatsoever had been given to preparing the community for the announcements—they talked about the work that had been done with the schools only not with the communities; they had done no work with the communities to prepare them for the announcement on closures—that was admitted at that meeting and I guess that left us thinking that the announcements were not going to be the way that they were. We believed that there were going to be some sensible closures some sensible mergers and that they would be the ones that have been sought. We have already heard that there are two schools that are voluntarily going to seek closure in the time frame indicated by the Minister. Everyone accepts there has to be change but nothing prepared the people of Christchurch for the change that this Government has wrought upon them. 
Did the Minister give any thought to the crushing blow that this announcement would have on the parents and the children who have seen these schools as the mainstay of their lives? I want to remind this House that children were at schools in Christchurch on the day of the earthquake on 22 February and those teachers and principals made sure that there was somebody with the children all day until the parents could come. But I know that there was a school where the parents never came and that is because the father was waiting in Latimer Square for his wife who would never be pulled from the CTV Building and that is a school that is going to close under the proposals if they are adopted by this Government. I just want to remind this House that there are people in Christchurch who have absolutely depended on the schools to give their children normality and to give them the security of knowing that they are in safe hands while their parents get on as best they can in terms of getting their own lives back to normal. It has been a hard row to hoe but I have to say that the way this announcement was announced was nothing less than cruel in terms of the impact it was going to have on people. 
What of the announcement itself? The day before we heard that confessed to by the Minister in the House as she answered questions today the principals of schools that were going to close or merge—and actually remember that if 18 schools merge it means that nine schools close; so there are a hell of a lot more than 13 schools that are going to close in Christchurch—got a phone call to come go a pre-launch briefing. So they went to the pre-launch briefing but before they went to the pre-launch briefing they rang around to find out who got the invitation to the pre-launch briefing and it started to emerge that actually maybe this was not going to be quite what they expected it to be. Was that part of the plan? Did the Government want to create that level of uncertainty so that people whose schools were not being merged or closed would somehow defend the Government’s behaviour? 
As people arrived at the meeting they were given name badges and then we found out that the colour of the name badge described what was going to happen to their school. This is how we treat principals and the chairs of boards of trustees. It is absolutely outrageous how they were treated. 
The Minister then gave a briefing to this assembled group of principals and board chairs and she told them about the $1 billion to be invested in Christchurch education. She did not say how much of that was going to be poured into the redundancies that will follow. She talked about the clusters and about how this was going to be a wonderful opportunity. While she was speaking they were distributing the packs to the teachers to the principals and to the board trustees and while they were sitting there hearing words like “restore” “consolidate” and “rejuvenate” they were reading their packs and their packs were telling them that the words “restore” “consolidate” and “rejuvenate” actually were Government spin for “repair” “merge” and “close”—Government spin for “repair” “merge” and “close”. 
I think that the Minister has been genuinely surprised at the overwhelming response of negativity from the people of Christchurch and she had to cancel her attendance at this principals’ conference. She knew it was on. She knew it would be a clash with this announcement and that confirms to me the view that she intended to release this at the end of August but changed the launch date as a result of the interference from the office of the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery and I am sure that he also advised her how to run Government spin around a bad announcement. She knew that the community would be looking for leadership at this time from its school leaders. How dare she treat communities like this—allowing the principals to be away at the time when the community needs them the most? It is arrogance that beggars belief. And now they are being led to believe that their views will count. 
Well I just remind this House what happened when this House was asked to look at Aorangi School. People will remember what happened with Aorangi primary school and how many of those students went to Burnside Primary School in the electorate of the Minister for Canterbury Earthquake Recovery. How is he going to go and face those parents and explain to them why he closed this school and is now closing the school where they have gone? 
I find it unbelievable really that the Government has taken this approach. I do not believe that the Government is really going to listen to the people at all because the Minister has made it clear that these are firm proposals. These schools are predetermined. I want to remind the Minister that when a board wants to merge or close there are list of questions that the ministry asks the boards to consider. What educational benefits for students would we hope to achieve? Will there be educational and/or social advantages for the students in a larger school? How far away are neighbouring schools? What travel would be involved for the students? Would these schools provide the education the parents are seeking? What are the educational benefits? 
These are the questions that we will be asking. I believe that Government members have failed to stand in this urgent debate which they said they were perfectly well aware was going to happen today and the Minister did not answer a single question that her own ministry would ask a board to answer before it would consider a merger or a closure. 
Everyone expects change to happen in Christchurch; they do not expect a bombshell like this to be dumped on a very very damaged community.