Mapp Wayne: State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Mapp Wayne: State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12186] 
Dr WAYNE MAPP (National—North Shore) 
: 
 The whole intent of this bill is contained in the title State Sector Amendment Bill (No 3) and the reason why the intent is contained there is that it represents the centralisation of power into the State. Although the Minister may be proud of that and he obviously is because that is the intent of the Government the National Opposition is deeply opposed because the bill represents a turning away from community power. It represents a turning away from trusting the boards of trustees who are the real employers or should be—at least in law—of teachers. Instead as indeed other clauses indicate all the power is to be vested in the State Services Commissioner under the direct control of the Minister acting at ministerial direction so that the Government at all times is the principal and sole negotiator of agreements with teachers in collective contracts. 
Of course it is the intent of the Government that every single teacher in New Zealand in the public sector—in secondary schools and in primary schools—will be governed by a collective contract. I was surprised to hear one of the speakers Mr Jim Peters for the New Zealand First Party say he had remained a member of the Post Primary Teachers Association until 2002. Apparently that was because at least he knew what it was doing but unfortunately it lends credence to the power of the union; the power of the collective. When well-talented able people realise that that is the pathway to mediocrity then our teaching profession will expand and grow in the way that so many teachers—and I include Mr Peters—would actually wish it to do. 
After all as he said he was a founding member of the Secondary Principals Association of New Zealand and the whole purpose of that association was to break the chains with the Post Primary Teachers Association; to recognise that centralised State-controlled big unions big government were inimical to teacher quality teacher excellence and of course what that means is excellence in teaching for students be they in not-so-good schools or excellent schools. But the real focus should be back on that relationship. 
The way one does that is to empower the schools—that is boards of trustees the principal the community and the teachers who work in that school. I know that it is a fundamentally different philosophy to that espoused by Labour. I know that Labour’s pattern which it is proud of is State control at every level. That is its intent and this bill recognises that intent. That is why I am so surprised that United Future is lending its support to such an approach. 
The one thing that can be said about the Green Party is that at least it recognises the power of community. That is its raison d’être in fact. So it would say that State centralised control as represented by this bill is the wrong way to go. That is why the Greens vote against it. For National and ACT other parties that are making sensible votes today we say we want to empower communities also give freedom to parents and communities and actually give freedom to teachers. I would have thought that United Future—a party that believes in common sense—would take the same approach. Frankly I would have expected New Zealand First to take the same approach. I know that New Zealand First says it is taking a pragmatic approach to upcoming negotiations and so forth but this was its opportunity to make a philosophical statement about where it stood. That is the opportunity that it has lost.