Brown SimeonSIMEON BROWN (National—Pakuranga): Thank you Madam Speaker and happy New Year. It's great to be back. The only part of that speech that I agree with the Associate Minister of Education on was I like Shane Reti." because I do like Shane Reti too. He's a good man.The Minister said in her speech that 13 of the 16 polytechs were failing because they were in deficit. Well according to her logic 11 of the 12 DHBs must also be failing because they are in deficit and also this Government is in deficit so is this Government also failing? An extraordinary thing for this Minister of the Crown to be saying about her own Government.It's a pleasure to be able to take a call on the second reading of the Education (Vocational Education and Training Reform) Amendment Bill. I'd like to just start by acknowledging the Minister of Education for bringing this bill to the House. This bill does make significant reforms in this area. I'd like to also acknowledge the chair Parmjeet Parmar who was able to shepherd this very complex bill through the select committee. It's several hundred pages long and it's something which I and all the members of that committee spent a lot of time reading those submissions and trying to get a good understanding of what the Government's changes are. I'd also like to acknowledge all the submitters who submitted and the 94 who came to appear before the select committee.These reforms represent a significant risk to training and apprenticeships here in New Zealand. The Tertiary Education Commission programme business case says that this bill will lead to 18000 fewer trainees across New Zealand over the medium term and 2300 fewer apprenticeships. When the Minister says that this bill is putting trades and apprenticeships back on the map he could not be further from the truth. This bill does exactly the opposite. Also the additional cost of these reforms—a cost of $200 million to $400 million over six years to bring these reforms into place and an additional cost of $50 million per year just to make the system work.I'd like to also just point out from the submitters their concerns over what this will mean for their industry. I'd like to quote from the submission from the New Zealand Association of Registered Hairdressers where they said that "While we understand the desire for some change we do not support the level of risk for our apprentices and our industries associated with the implementation of this … bill. … In fact members are already holding back from taking on new apprentices as they struggle with the uncertainty of Government statements on this issue." This bill is already having a negative impact and it hasn't even been passed.The second point I'd like to raise is the loss of regional autonomy in this bill. There has been mixed views from our polytechs to this question but what is true is that they are all losing local decision-making. They are losing control over their local assets and they will no longer have control over these decisions at a local level.I'd like to quote from two submitters from two polytechs where they raised significant concerns about these issues. Firstly from Otago polytech where they said that this bill will impede "local decision-making and flexibility and compromises innovation by providing for the dissolution of subsidiaries defines an excessively narrow mission for the NZIST and compromises academic freedom." And I'll touch on academic freedom shortly. The Southern Institute of Technology (SIT) said—Hon Clare Curran: You didn't even turn up in Dunedin. SIMEON BROWN: —in their submission—and there's the member for Dunedin South complaining about the SIT and talking about how bad they must be at their job when in fact they're one of the most successful polytechs in the country. I think that she should be ashamed of the comments that she's making. The SIT said "SIT and our Southland community are concerned that this proposal will inhibit the innovation and competitive edge that has made SIT successful in the past." They go on to say "these SIT initiatives are a crucial driving force of SIT's recruitment ability and are integral for SIT to attract and retain domestic and international students to our Southland community to address Southland's pressing skills shortage requirements." That goes again to the heart of how this bill is affecting the regions and affecting their need for skills across New Zealand. Finally I'd like to touch on the issue of academic freedom where there has been a range of submissions from all sorts of sector groups on this issue. The Tertiary Education Union even submitted making it very clear that they were not pleased with the crackdown essentially of academic expression and academic freedom in this bill. They made significant recommendations which have only just been partially fulfilled in the changes the select committee made. I raise this issue because whilst there may have been a change made by the select committee to ensure that academic freedom is put back in place in part for the New Zealand Institute of Skills and Technology this does not flow through to any subsidiaries that it currently allows for and that is a point which I think there will need to be more debate on in the House. So overall Madam Speaker I want to thank you for the opportunity to speak on this bill. The National Party continues to oppose it for a variety of reasons but we do thank the submitters we do thank them for their views and we look forward to the committee of the whole House stage. We will be bringing rigorous Supplementary Order Papers to the Table to make positive changes so that we can make this bill work in a better way for New Zealanders. Thank you Madam Speaker."