Barclay ToddTODD BARCLAY (National—Clutha-Southland): I rise in opposition to this bill for two reasons. Firstly it will achieve absolutely nothing. It is absolute jiggery-pokery and if this is all the Labour Party can suggest in terms of reformation of the education sector then we know we are on the right track. Secondly this member's bill rehashes a Labour Party Supplementary Order Paper 22 to the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) from 2014 which was before the House. We opposed it then and we are opposing it again now. The ironic thing is that the Labour Party put forward a member's bill that is actually redundant because of what has happened since Ruth Dyson put the bill in the biscuit tin. She had the opportunity to pull it out and save herself some embarrassment. She decided not to let it sit in there and linger collecting crumbs and then what she did when she saw that the professional code of ethics was released was she did not say: Oh right maybe I am on the wrong track. Maybe the profession is actually right behind this. They are right behind this and they support the approach that the Government is taking." So she kept it in there and the Labour Party once again embarrassed itself.I think the name proposed by Ms Dyson was previously used in 1996 by an independent voluntary teacher-run professional body. The ironic thing about that is the organisation folded after 2 years due to lack of support from the teachers themselves. Why would the Labour Party which claims to be a supporter of the teaching body put forward something that is not even supported by the teachers' bodies themselves? I think the funny thing about this is that the Labour Party which used to be the party for the teachers the party for education—that is long gone. Under Hekia Parata's superb leadership in the education sector bringing together a ministerial cross-sector forum reforming the Education Act conducting a fundamental review of education funding initiating in her first couple of weeks as Minister of Education the ministerial inquiry into sex offenders in schools—that was one of the toughest things that this Government has done in the first couple of weeks of the second term of Government to take on quite a controversial issue and deliver a result. The inquiry by former Ombudsman Mel Smith and former chief executive officer (CEO) of the Education Review Office and the Ministry of Women's Affairs Dr Judith Aitken ultimately recommended that the first thing that the Government should do is implement a code of conduct. Well we have done that. This is what this bill sets out to try to cross right through and it has no fundamental value-add to what this Government has done over the last 6 years. Ruth Dyson clearly has not paid any attention to what her sector's requests are in this space. She clearly has not paid any attention whatsoever to what has happened in the education sector under the leadership of the Hon Hekia Parata. The bill adds no substance. It is absolute jiggery-pokery. Labour knew that this bill became completely redundant as soon as the draft code of conduct was released but refused to withdraw it wasting Parliament's time and wasting taxpayers' dollars. It is ironic given we are doing a funding review of the education sector at the moment which aspires to have a clearer line of sight of the value of taxpayers' dollars in education. The Labour Party opposes that. It opposes this. It opposes what we have done in the code of conduct. Quite apart from the politics and setting aside that this is a National Government initiative what this bill does actually is it is a complete and utter insult to very highly respected people in the sector. Mel Smith former Ombudsman recommended this as part of his review of the ministerial inquiry into sex offenders in schools. Dr Judith Aitken former CEO of the Education Review Office and Dr Graham Stoop who is the former CEO of the Education Review Office and current CEO of the Education Council of Aotearoa New Zealand—they are all recommending the steps the Government is taking. What Ruth Dyson fails to understand is that this is not about politics. This is about fundamentally experts in the sector recommending some changes that will help enhance the sector and help protect the teaching profession and vulnerable children but what she does is try to take a pot-shot at the Government and a pot-shot at the Minister of Education. This bill is an utter disgrace and an utter waste of taxpayers' dollars. That is why I oppose this bill."