Swarbrick ChlöeCHLÖE SWARBRICK (Green): It is a pleasure to rise after the fearmongering speeches of the Opposition. I want to address a few of the points that have been raised which I think build off the back of moral panic but also off the back of a lack of facts and a lack of evidence. So as has been well traversed this bill does two things. The first is restoring elected members to the council so that teachers can elect their own. As noted by Denise Lee that will be seven of the 13 members and it renames the Education Council to the Teaching Council.Something that I wish to quote to ground this debate in given that we are all going through the history books is the Hansard of the second reading of the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) which actually first removed elected members progressed by the then Minister of Education Hekia Parata. This is from Catherine Delahunty and I quote teachers are not necessarily going to be on EDUCANZ unless the Minister thinks it is a good idea. It is pretty odd thinking to make a professional body chosen by non-professionals—i.e. by politicians. It is going to be appointed by the Minister and then he or she will let some teachers be on it but will decide who they are. That is a low-trust model. It is a continuation of a low-trust model. Really in the context of the educational debates that have taken place over the last 6 years we do not need any more low-trust models. We need a bit of mutual respect and we need a professional body like a teachers council—if you must call it EDUCANZ—to be elected by the teachers for the teachers."This bill the Education (Teaching Council of Aotearoa) Amendment Bill is ultimately about trusting the teaching profession. It's about lifting the status of teachers by ensuring that they are able to elect their representatives in the same way that other professionals are—whether they be doctors or lawyers. It is indeed actually also about independence which I note the Opposition cited in their minority view out of the select committee stating and I quote "It is of ultimate importance that the professional organisation such as the Education Council are to be seen as independent from both government and industry advocacy organisations." On that point how are they independent from government if they are appointed by the Minister wholesale? If they are not accountable to the industry whom are they accountable to?I want to address also the point made by Parmjeet Parmar the chair of my Education and Workforce Committee stating that the Minister is saying that elected members are better than appointed members. I'd say that nobody is actually saying that because indeed as was noted by the previous speaker Denise Lee this is a mixed council. There will be both appointed and elected members. So if I can flip that on its head I want to ask the members of the Opposition: are they saying that appointed members are better than elected members? Are they saying that they know better than the profession? Then Tim Macindoe spoke to how this bill was coming off the back of a lack of thorough consultation or evidence. And on that point I just wanted to cite the stats around the consultation—that being the submissions to select committee on the original 2015 bill which removed elected members where 1032 submitters submitted regarding the Education Council point. In particular 995 were opposed and 92 percent of them were in full opposition to the changes that being removing those elected representatives.Then Mr Macindoe went on to speak about how this was about dogma or about ideology stating that not all teachers have the same ideological slant. And I guess he absolutely proves that point. But this is the thing right? What we're saying on this side of the House is that we don't presume that all teachers think the same. Actually we don't presume what teachers think. That's why we want them to elect their own representatives—to tell us exactly that. I turn to the point about expenses which has been bandied around quite a lot throughout this debate because I think it's really actually the only point that the Opposition has that is of any substance with regard to this debate—the cost; the incredible cost. Well democracy doesn't come cheap. And on the point about the $150000 every three years to hold elections for the council $35 million every three years is spent on general elections and if it's good enough for us why is it not good enough for the teachers?As to the other points of cost I just think the Opposition should perhaps go through the history books perhaps a little deeper because they will find that prior to the changes made by their former education Minister Hekia Parata all of these costs would have been funded by the teachers' levy. But it was indeed that previous Minister Hekia Parata who introduced Government subsidies for the operation of the council.So what I want to leave on the kind of question that I'd like to put to the Opposition is that if they are so concerned about the state of the teaching profession if they were so concerned about the strike that occurred yesterday if they really want to improve the outcomes for our children if they really want to improve the state of the profession where were they yesterday? Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker."