Parmar ParmjeetDr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): Thank you Madam Speaker. Our position on this bill hasn't changed. I'm taking this call to say that we'll be opposing this legislation in the third reading—this is the Education (Vocational Education and Training Reform) Amendment Bill. It was really interesting to see how the Hon Tracey Martin got so excited about the company that Dr Shane Reti mentioned he is planning to set up in partnership with her. I should say that she should not get too hopeful because no we have already ruled out New Zealand First and we will not be working with New Zealand First. That's very very clear. I thought I'd make it very clear because she appeared so excited about that.I'm disappointed to hear the way the Hon Tracey Martin talked about taxpayers' money. All of a sudden now this Government has realised that taxpayers' money has to be valued differently. The way she talked about taxpayers' money and control over polytechs clearly shows this Government is about control. It's not about polytechs it's not about local communities it's not about local learners it's not about local businesses but it's all about their control.This legislation as we know is to integrate vocational education and workplace training into one statute. This reform—we have been saying this from day one—is going to be really disastrous for the vocational education sector. We know this is going to bring a centralised approach which is not going to work. We have been saying that and there are several reasons why we believe that the centralised approach through the setup of the New Zealand Institute of Skills and Training will not work. We also notice that workforce development councils (WDCs) will be taking control of all 11 industry training organisations (ITOs) These 11 ITOs will be absorbed into these WDCs and we know that small ITOs will suffer because there will be no way for them to have their voice heard in this whole process.Talking about process from the start we have seen that this has been a very very rushed process. These Government parties were in Opposition for nine years but all of a sudden when the Government was formed after the last general election in 2017—an accidental Government; that is what people say and I agree with them—they didn't know what to do so they carried on with the Order Paper that was set up by the previous National Government. For up to around 1½ years' time we saw Ministers rushing to the House to fill up the House time because they wanted the House obviously continuing and wanted to look like they had some business on the Order Paper. Then in just the last few months we are seeing this kind of legislation coming up and the whole process has been rushed through. We would have actually liked to see that more time was given to this kind of legislation because it is such a big reform of our vocational education sector.In the select committee process we had to sit in subcommittees. There's a reason why we have a number for each select committee. These people those who submit they spend a lot of their time to write their submission and then appear before the select committee as well. I can imagine it must have been really disappointing for them to come to Wellington and Dunedin as well—we had some submitters there—to see only three or four members on that select committee. It was only because we had to meet the report time line for this legislation to the House. Not just that; in the committee of the whole House yesterday I was really disappointed to see that while members this side members that are standing up with their local polytechnics were taking calls Government members were really keen to shut down the debate. We have been fighting and we have been very clear that we will continue to fight for these polytechnics. We want that localism maintained and we will make sure that polytechnics continue to have that kind of localism when we come back in Government.The other important point that my colleagues have also raised is about their assets. We had the big lecture from the Hon Tracey Martin that taxpayers' money can be taken away any time but what about their effort that they have put in to establish that polytechnic according to the industry needs that are there at the local level? It's really disappointing to see that this Government thinks that they can come and put a control like they want to through this centralised approach which we know is not going to work for anybody at the local level. Having this head office dictating to all these polytechnics what they should be doing we have no confidence in this model. We do not believe that this kind of model is actually going to work and will understand what local industry needs are.I raised this before yesterday in the committee of the whole House that the Auckland region is a very different region compared to other regions. There might be some similarities in other regions but Auckland definitely has some dissimilarities and we need to take into account those dissimilarities. Putting them under that same head office is not going to deliver for the Auckland region.The other point I mentioned was about immigration. Yes we acknowledge some polytechnics are suffering and it's not because of other reasons but one of the reasons that we know is this current Government's policies because as soon as this Government was formed there was a negative signal sent out to the country's international students. They stopped coming into our country and that's why so many polytechnics have been suffering. Yes it's easy to blame so many other reasons but I believe that this has been one of the main reasons because our international education sector is vital for these polytechnics. Now of course we have coronavirus which we have talked about so these polytechnics are going to suffer even more while they're going through this reform that is being imposed on them by this Government.The next issue that I want to raise is about job losses. The Minister the Hon Chris Hipkins himself has accepted that there will be substantial job losses—the substantial" word has been used. Our tertiary education spokesperson Dr Shane Reti has been saying this from day one—that there'll be at least more than a thousand jobs lost—more than a thousand jobs that we believe will be lost because of this reform.It's really sad that this Government takes this lightly. At the start of this year the Ministry of Business Innovation and Employment—this is because of their other policy—said that there will be 6500 jobs lost because of their policies in this year and now with this legislation we will see more job losses. These people have been working hard in their sector and if we see these polytechnics in our regions—cities are different—some of those people I believe are living there only because they have that job in that polytechnic. Now those people when they become jobless what kinds of opportunities will they have? They may not have other opportunities available to them that match their skillset. But this Government thinks it's fine for this many people to lose jobs. On this side we care about employment; we know that employment is important for people. The economy's already sliding into a really really bad place under this Government business confidence is going down people are not employing people and here this legislation will lead to job losses and as I said more than a thousand people will be losing jobs because of this legislation.So how can this legislation be a good thing for us? We have been hearing a lot about making the vocational education sector sustainable. Sustainable? Yes. Providing access? Of course it has been providing access to people—those who need training. We said that yes there are some polytechnics that are struggling but there are polytechnics that are doing well as well. So who is going to make sure that the polytechnics that are working well will be actually provided support to do better?Polytechnics that need support—we want to be sure that they will be lifted up. But in this legislation we do not get that assurance. All we see is this is a big reform so it will be a centralised approach—that is what this legislation will bring but there is no assurance that this will actually really support our polytechnic sector. And as I said yes all polytechnics are not the same—there are some polytechnics that are doing really well and we have no assurance that they will be doing better with these reforms.Talking about assets again and cash reserves—it's important that those polytechnics are able to utilise those resources for their own development and that won't be happening under this Government because this Government likes to have that control. Nanny State—they are quite known for bringing nanny State and this legislation actually is a very good example of that. They want to control everything from here; they want to look like they know what's happening in different parts of a country without going out and talking to people without giving them the opportunity to say what they have to.So we are quite disappointed because this legislation is going to take away the voice of local businesses local learners local employers. Thank you Madam Speaker."