Martin TraceyTRACEY MARTIN (NZ First): Tēnā koe Mr Speaker. Just before I begin the topic of my general debate speech I just want to point out that the housing crisis has been mentioned a lot here today and so it should be because it is a crisis. If people would like to be aware the Rt Hon Winston Peters will be making a very large policy announcement for New Zealand First in Palmerston North tomorrow. They might like to take the time to go along and have a listen and see a real solution to a real problem. The topic of my speech is actually Salisbury School. A year ago—actually it was not quite a year ago—on 13 August 2015 I put out a press release predicting that this Government would starve Salisbury School of students so that it could then publicly debate that it cost too much to keep open. I want to remind the public of New Zealand what has happened since 2012 with regard to the only—the only—single sex for girls special-needs boarding school in New Zealand. In 2012 the parents and the elected board of trustees of Salisbury School felt so strongly about Minister Parata's intention to close Salisbury School and they feared so much for the physical safety of those very vulnerable young women that they took the Government to court. They took the Minister to court in 2012—to the High Court to be precise—and they won. The High Court ruled that it was illegal for the Minister to close that school. The High Court ruled that by creating a coeducational facility at Halswell and removing the opportunity to have a single-sex high-needs boarding facility for these young women it would place these young women at risk of sexual assault. That is the outcome that happened in 2012. Let us talk about the fact that the Minister now argues in media releases that it is too expensive for the nine remaining students at Salisbury School to remain there because the Intensive Wraparound Service (IWS) is so much cheaper at $27000. Let us just address the number of students that this Government has managed to manipulate down to nine. In 2012 there was a cap on the number of students that could be enrolled at Salisbury School of 80. If you extrapolate out the current costs that the Minister herself uses to say it is now too expensive if that school was still able to maintain the roll of 80—it had 72 at the time of the court ruling—then it would be cheaper to actually have these young women at Salisbury School for 24 hours' worth of care in a highly educative and supportive environment than it would be to put them into the IWS. But this Government halved that cap in 2013. There was no consultation. There are no fewer young women out there who actually suffer from Prader-Willi syndrome or any other syndrome but it halved the cap because that is the philosophical bent of this Government. Then by September 2015 it had taken it down to 30. Earlier this year it took it down to 20. Nobody was allowed to get into Salisbury School. This Government took away the right of parents to apply for their young women to be inside this school and they had to go through the IWS committees. The IWS committees decline decline decline parents who want their young women to go into this safe secure and educational environment. This Government gives millions of dollars of taxpayers' money to charter schools under the name of parental choice. This Government is arguing under global funding to give millions of dollars of taxpayers' money to private schools under the guise of parental choice. Where is the parental choice for the parents of these incredibly vulnerable young women? Where is the responsibility of this Minister should a sexual assault take place at Halswell—a pilot that this Minister put forward knowing that the High Court had said it was high risk? Upon the outcome of that court ruling she immediately started a pilot of coeducation and she did it deliberately. This Government has deliberately starved Salisbury School of students for this very moment. Mr Smith this is in your electorate. This is in your electorate and you stand silently while they put these young women at risk. Shame on you sir. Shame on you. Stand up for this school and stand up for these young women.The debate having concluded the motion lapsed.