Kaye NikkiHon NIKKI KAYE (National—Auckland Central): Look I want to pick up on Chris Bishop's speech and I want to just remind us for a moment of some of the moments that we had in the Education and Workforce Committee: Sir Toby Curtis turning to the committee and saying Could the Prime Minister show some aroha?" I do want to address the Prime Minister this evening. I want to address her because she made comments to our previous Leader of the Opposition Bill English to the effect that there could be a pathway for these partnership schools if they followed the curriculum if they had comparable funding and if they had registered teachers. Here is the reality: these schools were following the curriculum. Many schools in New Zealand don't have registered teachers; they have limited authority to teach. These schools had comparable funding. But the reality is not only did the Prime Minister not follow up on that commitment but also she never turned up. She morally failed these children. That is the truth here. She did not visit the schools she did not keep that commitment publicly and that is not only it.I look at the Ministry of Education's regulatory impact statement and I object to it. It says that the Labour Party campaigned on getting rid of partnership schools. That is not true. Where were Kelvin Davis and Willie Jackson who both publicly prior to the election said that they believed in partnership schools? In fact Kelvin Davis said that he would resign. This regulatory impact statement by the Ministry of Education is false. It's wrong. The reality is that not only has the Prime Minister failed these children but also a number of these processes around getting rid of partnership schools have been completely wrong incorrect and legally improper and I want to talk you through them.The Minister of Education put the Crown potentially at legal risk by announcing that they would all be gone anyway before he had terminated the contracts—process error number one. The second thing is that for months on end these schools did not know what their future was and they were left in a situation of limbo. The next question that I have for the Minister of Education is: not only has this been a moral failure; it has been a fiscal failure and I want the Minister to front up. I want him to front up on the exact compensation cost for these schools and also the running costs because I tell you what I'm hearing: I'm hearing that actually there were a number of agreements made by the Minister and the Ministry of Education that are not being upheld. So not only have these schools been terminated but also there's been some deals behind the scenes that are not being honoured.I hope that there is a journalist listening. I hope that there are some journalists that will try and uncover that and ask the question: is it the case that not only have these schools been terminated but we've got legislation being rushed through when there's a Waitangi Tribunal claim being opposed by a number of iwi leaders and also that it might be that the Crown is not living up to its deal in terms of some of the things that it offered these schools to become designated character?I would argue that not only is it a moral failure but it is a fiscal failure. Is it $10 million? Is it $20 million? Is it $30 million? What is the cost of the ideological drive of this Government to shut down schools that are helping some of our most vulnerable children? Well we want to know and we don't want this legislation to go through. We want the Minister of Education to stand up now in this House and tell us what is the cost of that particularly at a time when we've got the Prime Minister and the Minister of Education saying to the teachers that there's no more money—there's no more money. But there's billions of dollars of surplus and there's been a whole lot of money for diplomats but there's no more money for teachers. So why can't the Minister of Education then confirm exactly how much it has cost the Crown the Government the people of New Zealand to close these schools? How much has it cost? We want to know that. It's a moral failure it's a fiscal failure and it's a legal failure.I want to deal with this Waitangi Tribunal claim. I do have Supplementary Order Papers that try to deal with this and I would love the Minister to tell this committee why it is that he needs to push this legislation through this week. Why can't he meet with Sir Toby Curtis? Why can't he meet with Dame Iritana Tāwhiwhirangi? Why can't he meet with Lance O'Sullivan? Why can't he meet with these people? Why can't he meet with the claimants that have put in a number of iwi leaders to discuss the issues at hand? Why does the legislation need to go through now? Why won't he do that? I have put amendments which effectively say "How about we give the respect to these iwi leaders and let that process happen?" That is the right thing to do. Forget the moral and the fiscal failure that has already happened. Why are we pushing this legislation through at a time where you have this Waitangi Tribunal claim?Finally I just want to finish on national standards. Again as I've said before ultimately there are a few policies that would affect parents so much but something that involves reporting about their child's achievement you would think that there would be huge consultation on that. Well I have just again gone back to the regulatory impact statement and it's really clear. It says national standards were effectively scrapped on 13 December of last year by this Minister and again in that regulatory impact statement it says there was no systematic stakeholder consultation. So again I make this point to the Minister: not only is there a moral and fiscal failure around partnership schools but he has morally failed parents on national standards."