Hipkins Chris: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Hipkins Chris: Education Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:662;Page:10297] 
CHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka) 
: 
 I just want to pick up one of the comments that— 
Hon Simon Power 
: Speaking of rising stars! 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: I thank Mr Power very much. I appreciate the endorsement. 
Hon Simon Power 
: Believe me it won’t help. It didn’t help me; it won’t help you. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: That member has got his future behind him! 
CHRIS HIPKINS 
: That is right—his best years. 
I want to pick up the comments made by the Minister of Education regarding the amendments put forward by members of the Labour Party and the bill as drafted by the previous Labour Government. I think it is a terrible shame that the Government has decided to vote against some of the provisions put forward by Labour that would have clarified the responsibilities of a school board of trustees. It is something that I think new board members who will be elected at this year’s elections would appreciate—a clear articulation of exactly what it is they will be responsible for. National is voting against what I think is a very common-sense and practical amendment put forward by Labour. Why is National opposed to articulating in the legislation that a school board of trustees’ responsibility is ensuring the enrolment at a school of all persons who are entitled to be enrolled at the school? Surely nobody could object to articulating clearly that one of the responsibilities of a board of trustees is ensuring that education is provided to each student enrolled at a school. That is what a school is all about. Why can we not articulate that in legislation so that school boards of trustees are very clear and can be held to account against those responsibilities as set down in legislation? 
There is the responsibility to promote a school environment that supports the highest standards of achievement for all students. The National Government keeps talking about raising standards and setting standards in education yet it wants to vote down the idea that schools should be held accountable for that that a school board of trustees should have that responsibility defined in legislation. National is going to vote against that. 
Actively managing and monitoring the performance of the principal and ensuring that the performance of the school’s other staff is actively managed and monitored are things that I think are really important to articulate as being a responsibility of a school board of trustees. Having spoken to a number of members of school boards of trustees I know that a different approach is taken in some schools. Some boards see their job as being the employer of the principal and therefore any other responsibility for staff employed within the school is no responsibility of theirs; all the responsibility is then on the principal. This amendment would clearly set down for boards of trustees that one of the board’s responsibilities is ensuring that the performance of the school’s other staff is actively managed and monitored and board members cannot simply say that it is a matter that only a school principal needs to deal with. Yes boards of trustees have the primary management responsibility for the principal but they do have a role in making sure that other staff are actively managed and monitored as well. 
Another responsibility set down for a school board of trustees is the active management of and reporting on a school’s performance against the aims and objectives set out in the school charter. This is a Government that says that it wants parents to have more information about how schools are doing and how kids are doing yet it is opposed to the idea that one of the fundamental responsibilities of a school board of trustees should be active management of and reporting on a school’s performance. That is one of the things put forward by the previous Labour Government. It is a very common-sense thing but the National Government is opposed to it. 
Ensuring that a school including its assets finances and property is managed in a financially responsible manner has to be one of the central functions of a school’s governance. A school cannot be effectively governed if the board of trustees is not ensuring that its assets finances and property are managed in a financially responsible manner. That has to be something that is clearly set down as a responsibility of a school board of trustees. I do not understand at all why the Government seems opposed to articulating very clearly and concisely what the responsibility is of a school board of trustees. A new school board of trustees member—and there will be new members after the elections this year—should be able to know that. 
I will also turn to some of the recommendations put forward by the select committee. The select committee has recommended that only natural persons and not bodies corporate may be appointed as limited statutory managers or commissioners of a school but a natural person may be appointed “as being of a named body corporate”. I think that is really important. I speak to schools in my own electorate who have been the subject of limited statutory management. They tell me that relationships are vital; having a good relationship with the limited statutory manager is really important. Limited statutory managers effectively take away some of the responsibility from a school’s board of trustees. In doing so they are handed a great amount of trust and responsibility. It is important that they have a good relationship a relationship of trust with the community that they are there to serve. That relationship would be hindered if there was not an actual person with whom a school could identify and say “This is our person; this is the person we are dealing with.” I think that that amendment put forward by the select committee is very sensible. 
The committee also recommends inserting new clauses to allow the Minister of Education to split one or more schools from a combined establishment board. That will allow for the situation where one of a group of new schools is ready to be opened before the others and it will allow the Minister to split off a new board to govern the school that is opened while retaining a combined establishment board for the remaining schools. I think that that is a very sensible practical amendment put forward by the select committee. It is one that I think should be supported. 
In conclusion I have to say that I am at a loss to explain why the National Government seems so opposed to clearly articulating a school board of trustees’ responsibilities. I think that is really important in the case of limited statutory managers and I have spoken to some schools in my own electorate that have said that relationships are really important and having a person they can deal with is really important. I think that is something that the select committee has recommended and something that I think the House should support. Overall many of the amendments put forward in this bill are positive; they are constructive amendments. It is a shame that the Government has put on blinkers and has said that only the amendments it is putting forward itself are those it will support; it will not look wider and it will not pick up many of the other practical sensible things put forward by the previous Labour Government or by members on the Labour side at the present time.