Hipkins ChrisCHRIS HIPKINS (Labour—Rimutaka): I too want to talk about cohort entry and I have got a number of questions for the Minister in the chair on that. I just want to make one sort of concluding remark on consultation around the process. This folder that I have here entitled Education Act Review" summarises I think some of the consultation that went on before the bill was introduced in the House and I do want to acknowledge the process that the Minister and the ministry engaged with. I think people enjoyed the opportunity to discuss the Act. I think that where the concern arises is that there were a number of elements that drew together at the end of that consultation process that are not reflected in the bill or regarding which the Government has taken a different view. I think that that is where you get the comment from people around the statement of National Education and Learning Priorities that "Even if there is consultation we might not get what we want." I think that is where some of the anxiety arises.But moving on to cohort entry—I noted the Minister's contribution around the fact that we are one of the outliers in the OECD in terms of having kids starting whenever their parents want after the age of 5. I want to question a bit more the educational research that underpins the Government's decision to move to a cohort entry system because the Education Review Office did a review of our existing transitions from early childhood education through to schooling and it actually found that that was one of the strengths of the New Zealand system. Because kids are starting school individually the schools are able to put together a more individualised if you like wraparound package for the kids when they start school. The Education Review Office actually found that internationally we are one of the best countries at doing that—at supporting that transition from early childhood education through to schooling. I guess what I would like to ask the Minister in that regard is: how are we going to ensure that we do not lose something that is internationally recognised now as a strength of our system when we move to cohort entry?The second part—these are all fairly rapid-fire questions on cohort entry—is the impact on early childhood education centres. The Early Childhood Council has estimated that $12 million will go out of the early childhood sector as a result of the cohort entry policy. I would be interested in what work the Minister has done around the impact on early childhood services and whether cohort entry will have an effect on the financial viability of any of them.It was also noted by officials during the process that school is free but early childhood education is not so therefore it creates a financial incentive for parents to enrol kids at school as soon as they can rather than it being an educational incentive. What I would be interested in from the Minister's view is how the Government will ensure that it is educational decision-making driving that decision rather than cost.Around the 4-year-olds being allowed to enrol I am interested in why the Government chose to allow the 4 years and 10 months rather than the first cohort after the fifth birthday. In response to the Minister's comment around "Well it's not compulsory." the issue is that it is compulsory once they are enrolled. This is one of the changes that is being made—that is once a 4-year-old if they are 4 years and 10 months is enrolled in school it then becomes compulsory. I understand why this frustrates schools because if a 5-year-old was enrolled it was not compulsory for them to attend until they turned the age of 6 and this bill changes that quite a lot. So I guess the element of compulsion that comes in here is what we do in the situation where a 4-year-old starts school at 4 years and 10 months and then the parent decides: "Actually maybe that was too soon. Maybe this isn't quite the right decision for that child. Maybe we should be going back to an early childhood setting for a few months." Where does that leave the parents? Because at the moment the change that this bill makes is that once a child starts school that is it; it is compulsory for them to then attend.The next part that I want to probe I guess is how to ensure that schools make decisions around cohort entry based on educational practice and the best transitions rather than what is going to be the most administratively efficient. This bill devolves that decision to the schools but actually we want the schools if they are going to have that autonomy around that—how do we make sure that they are making the decision for the right reasons rather than because it is the most administratively efficient?The next question I have is around 6-year-olds because cohort entry does not actually apply to 6-year-olds. If a child has not enrolled in a school up until their sixth birthday they simply go to school the day after their sixth birthday regardless of whether that is as part of a cohort or not. I am interested in why the Government chose to exclude those 6-year-olds from the cohort entry policy.The final question that I have is around some advice that the ministry provided in its supplementary advice to the Education and Science Committee. The ministry talked about rejecting the alternative approach—some of which I have just canvassed—on page 3 of the supplementary questions we gave. It stated and this is a direct quote: "These alternative approaches will result in additional fiscal costs for the Crown. More children would stay in ECE longer resulting in additional ECE costs for the Government. There is no offsetting reduction in schooling costs". For me that rang an alarm bell because—I am open to cohort entry; I genuinely am open to cohort entry if there is a good educational reason for it—I just want to be sure that we are doing this in the best interests of the child's education rather than because it is the most administratively efficient or generates the most cost savings.I am happy to leave it at that. I mean I think there are plenty of questions in there for the Minister to address at some point."