5. Partnership Schools—Legislative Reform and Potential ClosuresHon NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) to the Minister of EducationPartnership Schools—Legislative Reform and Potential Closures5. Hon NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central) to the Minister of Education: Will he be repealing the legislation that covers partnership schools within the next six months and how many schools does he expect to close or be converted to another type of school?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS (Minister of Education): In answer to the first part of the question: no not within the first six months. In answer to the second part of the question: it's too early to make those decisions.Hon Nikki Kaye: Did he say to a Fairfax journalist as reported on 4 November that four schools due to open in 2019 would likely not go ahead?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I was awaiting advice from the Ministry of Education about charter schools at the time that I did make that statement.Hon Kris Faafoi: Have any charter schools been closed previously and if so what are the lessons learnt from that?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: Yes. One of the first charter schools was in fact closed within the first year of its operation. It cost the Crown over $5 million none of which has been recovered and there were several dozen students who needed to be re-accommodated in what was inevitably a very messy process. We are very keen to avoid that happening again in the future. Hon Nikki Kaye: In light of his previous answer has he received any advice communications or correspondence from officials or any other party on the potential legal or financial consequences of his reported comments on partnership schools?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The advice that I have received thus far indicates that the contracts that were due to be signed in October for those new charter schools were signed in September prior to the election. I have not received any advice on any particular legal risks around that.Hon Nikki Kaye: Will he guarantee that no partnership school will have their contract terminated without a comprehensive review whereby all of the schools will have the opportunity to make their case rather than finding out through the media?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I have been clear that we will negotiate in good faith on a case by case basis with all of the existing charter schools.Hon Nikki Kaye: Given the Prime Minister's comments yesterday that all people are entitled to care and compassion will he guarantee that he will personally visit all of these partnership schools or the sponsors of the proposed schools prior to making any decisions about the future of some of our most disadvantaged children?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I have been clear that we will deal with all of the issues around charter schools on a case by case basis and in good faith. The negotiations around potential changes to the contracts or arrangements will be conducted by the Ministry of Education and not by Ministers.Hon Nikki Kaye: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. This was a very simple yes or no—will he visit the schools of these most disadvantaged children—and he didn't answer the question.Mr SPEAKER: In a way similar I think to—[Gown slips from shoulders] Sorry about this. I'll get this right eventually. [Interruption] Pull it up? Thank you for your advice Mr Bridges. Similar to the advice that I gave to the Hon Steven Joyce earlier I think by omission the answer was actually clear.David Seymour: When the Minister told Newstalk ZB that one of his reasons for closing charter schools is that they were funded at a higher level than State schools was he quoting any advice he had received in his capacity as a Minister?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: I was drawing on the information that we obtained from the previous Government when I was an Opposition spokesperson.David Seymour: Supplementary?Mr SPEAKER: No. The member's having a good go. He gets two in a week but not in a week that's only got one question day. So you can't transfer your question from Tuesday because Tuesday wasn't a question day.David Seymour: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I seek your guidance. Surely this week the House has sat three times and all members on this side of the House have been disappointed to have only one question time but if we can at least use our allocated questions we will be OK.Mr SPEAKER: I'm sure that that argument would be supported by the Green Party and New Zealand First but it's not going to happen. You're not going to get all your questions for a week in the one day. I think I've been pretty generous with the member as to the arrangements that he's got and I wouldn't push it if I was him. You might be able to over time negotiate with some friends.Hon Chris Hipkins: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I know the general practice is to notify you of question transfers before they happen. Can I indicate that I would be happy to offer one of the Labour Party's supplementary questions to Mr Seymour.Mr SPEAKER: Would the member like one of the Labour Party's supplementaries?David Seymour: Oh yes I would. [Interruption]Mr SPEAKER: Order!Hon Kris Faafoi: Where's your friends David?David Seymour: Well you find friends in the most unexpected places.Mr SPEAKER: Was that you Mr Faafoi?Hon Kris Faafoi: Yes it was.Mr SPEAKER: Well Mr Seymour gets an extra supplementary.David Seymour: How can the Minister say to the media on one day that he is able to say with some certainty as quoted that he will be able to cancel the contracts of partnership schools set to open in 2019 and then say only two days later to a different media outlet that he is urgently seeking advice?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: In the comments I made to the journalist I also made it clear that I had sought advice on that matter.David Seymour: Has the Minister considered that by attempting to procure an end to the contracts through the press he has actually violated the contracts on behalf of the Crown?Hon CHRIS HIPKINS: The position of the parties that form up the Government has been clear for a long period of time from the point that the charter schools policy was first introduced.David Seymour: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question was with respect to the Minister's responsibilities and the legal implications of his statement as a Minister. His previous political positions surely are not relevant and he has made no attempt to address the question.Mr SPEAKER: And it's a pretty longstanding position in the House that Ministers have discretion about whether they answer questions that involve legal opinions. I think that the Minister probably went further than he had to.Hon Nikki Kaye: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. We'll just have to go back and check the Hansard but the original question that I asked—he was very careful as I see it. The Minister did not confirm that he received legal advice. He said financial" advice. So the way that I read it but we'll check the Hansard in the future is that he hasn't received legal advice so I think Mr Seymour is entitled—Mr SPEAKER: No and the point that I was making to Mr Seymour was that Mr Seymour was asking a question about the legal position of the Crown and that would be inviting a legal opinion from Chris Hipkins and he certainly does not have to give one.David Seymour: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Could I perhaps assist by asking that the Minister be given an opportunity to explain whether he avoided the question for legal reasons or just didn't want to answer it.Mr SPEAKER: The member I think is now just beginning to trifle with the Chair and while he's not in a position to lose any supplementary questions this week he could lose half of those from next week pretty quickly."