Williamson Maurice: Education (Restoration of Democracy to University Councils) Amendment Bill — First ReadingText is incorporated into the Bound VolumeWilliamson Maurice: Education (Restoration of Democracy to University Councils) Amendment Bill — First Reading[Sitting date: 02 December 2015. Volume:710;Page:8494. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.]Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON (National—Pakuranga): I am delighted to take a call on this bill. Can I first of all pay a huge compliment to my colleague Paul Foster-Bell who I have to say gave a magnificent speech. We learnt stuff about universities around the world from his speech that I think was absolutely outstanding. I cannot wait to get back to my office to download a copy of the speech and play it again tonight a number of times. Probably the DVD will come out as well if members want to take it to family and friends.I have to say that this is another example of the divide that exists between the left and the right in politics. I am not being derogatory or anything but the left truly do believe that there should be more controls there should be more mandatory requirements there should be more rigid structures in place for things to occur and that the Government should have a whole lot of legislation to control things. The right of politics depending on how far to the right you are believe in providing more freedom to an operation or an institution or to a financial product or whatever and allow for the people to make the choice themselves.I have to say that universities and polytechnics have got to be the best example of a market-driven unit of operation. They have no right to guarantee enrolments; they have to have people choose to come to them; they have to be on their mettle the whole time about the product and the standard that they offer and whether indeed they are going up in world ratings and being seen to be a phenomenal institution or they again have to be on their mettle to make sure they do not look like they are becoming stale and not the flavour of the month. And finally students are choosing to go elsewhere. If we had zoning for example like we have with schools and you lived in Auckland you had to go to Auckland University—Chris Bishop: Woo hoo!Hon MAURICE WILLIAMSON: I know I should not suggest this because Labour members—about three of them—are already scribbling down the idea for some legislation to have zoning in tertiary education. Thank goodness we do not. What makes me laugh is that they say it would be dreadful to have that but we will have it for schools. But if we had zoning in tertiary education then the universities would not have to worry. Stuart McCutcheon in Auckland would say: “Well we’ve got a catchment of 1.4 million”—or whatever it is—“and they have to come here so we’re fine.” But they know that almost daily they have got to keep looking at their perception in the media their perception from the students and their perception from the parents. Are we providing a good product?The changes that the National Government made were to try to give some flexibility to each one of the tertiary institutions that are out there because they are all different. It is not just that they are eight universities that are different. There are polytechnics there are private training establishments there are wānanga; there are big ones there are little ones there are fat ones and there are skinny ones. They are all different. To think you can have a one size fits all for them is just a mistake.That does not mean to say that it is not a good idea to have staff representatives on the councils. I actually think it is a brilliant idea to have them. I would say that if I was in any way involved in the council of a university I would be demanding that the council confront the issue of how we get staff representation so that we hear their views. You do not want to get bushwhacked a few months into a programme you are initiating because you had not brought the staff in. So it is a good idea. But why does it have to be mandatory? Some of those operations might be so small that they can actually consult with staff a handful of them in some cases and know their views without having to have them on the council. It is the same with regard to student representation. No one on this side of the House is saying that it is wrong to have student representation. I think it is a damn good idea to have it in most cases but not mandatory.I was quite interested to see some of the briefing notes that came from our research unit. I do not normally read a lot of this stuff but I read this. It talked about universities still being able to provide for staff and student representation on their councils. I knew that. It said that in fact seven of the eight universities have one student on their councils with the remaining institution having two student representatives. I am going to read that again: it is not compulsory they have got some freedom and flexibility and it is evil that we do not have mandatory student representation. Then seven of the eight universities do have it. They have obviously seen the merit of it. They have obviously seen the benefit of it. One of them even has two student representatives.This is a dopey piece of legislation and I mean really really dopey. It is a silly thing to be doing—putting a straitjacket around our institutions. I certainly will not be supporting the bill and I hope the House does not support it either.