Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Chair. I find it surprising that the member opposite Clare Curran just sat down and said And Southern Institute of Technology is going to deliver that." Well Southern Institute of Technology won't be around under this Government's reforms to deliver anything if the Minister can get away with making sure they nationalise all of our institutes of technology and polytechs across New Zealand. That speech was shameful.The member stood up and said that we're going to be building classrooms like no classrooms have ever been built before but all I heard were words and announcements and all sorts of other numbers. I'd like to quote my very learned friend Erica Stanford who interjected and said "Announcing a school is not building a school." That is what is in this Budget: half of their promises for building the schools are funded. Only half of the money is actually in there and I do echo the call from the member for East Coast Bays and say "Where is the school for Albany? Where is the money and where is the delivery for that electorate?"I also really am surprised to hear the member talk about partnership schools being closed down as if that's some incredible achievement by this Government and a 30-year vision for the future of our country. I think that's a victory for the unions but it's not a victory for the children who are going to those schools and whose lives are being changed so that their next 30 years would be turned around and so they could actually have a bright future.Then we come to vocational education where the member talked about the conversation and how there were skills shortages. Well I'm not sure if that member has actually read the business case which was released by the Minister only a couple of weeks ago which talked about the risk of workforce disruption being "almost certain" and the impact being "extreme"—whether she read the bit where it talked about participation in vocational education dropping being "almost certain" and the impact being "major" and whether she read the bit which said the needs of industry and employers not being met was "almost certain" and the impact "extreme". The proposed changes to our vocational education system by this Government verge on reckless and they will only lead to fewer people going into vocational education—the complete opposite vision which was outlined by the member opposite.This Budget is not delivering for New Zealanders. It is full of broken promises in the education sector and I would again like to touch on the impact of the fees-free policy which Shane Reti outlined as being something which is considered a flop. We've seen 2400 fewer students going to tertiary education last year than the year before. This policy was meant to increase participation in tertiary education but what we've seen is a reduction in the number of people going to tertiary education—a failure of a policy and an expensive mistake—and $197 million from that policy is now being allocated to the review of vocational education which is again going to be a mistake. The business case says it's going to cost probably twice that in order just to pay for the establishment costs of this new nationalised institute of skills and training. So not only does it rely on fees-free failing once but it relies on fees-free failing twice in order for that other policy to be able to be funded.The costs of the review of vocational education—not just the establishment costs but the ongoing costs—come to a staggering $686 million to $1.08 billion three times the benefits which are being estimated in the business case for that. That's not a cost-benefit analysis where the benefits outweigh the costs; that's a cost-benefit analysis where the costs outweigh the benefits. I'd expect that in that instance the Government would be looking at it and saying "No we won't be going down there." particularly with all of the incredible and major and extreme risks which are outlined in the business case. This policy will be the next fees-free flop."