Moroney Sue: Education (National Standards) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
Moroney Sue: Education (National Standards) Amendment Bill — First Reading Second Reading In Committee 
[Volume:651;Page:576] 
SUE MORONEY (Labour) 
: 
 Once upon a time during the election campaign for National education was the most important thing in the country. That is what Mr Key said. I noticed that by the time he made his Speech from the Throne it had slipped well down the rankings—well down the rankings. By then the economy was everything going for growth was everything. Education had slipped well down the agenda. 
The Education (National Standards) Amendment Bill is another example of how far down the agenda of the new arrogant National Government education has slipped. It has already slipped down because this bill is meaningless. It is a meaningless bill. It talks about national standards that actually are already in place and that schools already teach to. The standards are there already in the National Administration Guidelines—those things called NAGs. They already exist. So this bill is meaningless. But it is worse than meaningless; it is— 
Hon Anne Tolley 
: So why are you voting against it then? 
SUE MORONEY 
: I will tell Mrs Tolley; I will tell her right now. It is not only meaningless but potentially dangerous. That Minister has already misled the education sector by telling its members they would be excluded from the 90-day probationary period bill. That is what she told them; it is on video it has been on TV and everyone has seen it. She told them that. I ask Mrs Tolley whether that is correct. Did she tell them? [ 
Interruption 
] She is saying no. She was seen on TV saying that but she has come down to the House and denied that she told the education sector that its members would be excluded from the 90-day probationary period bill. She voted for that bill. She voted for the 90-day probationary period bill. An amendment was put to exclude teachers from it. How did Anne Tolley vote? How did she vote on that amendment? Anne Tolley voted against the amendment to exclude teachers from the 90-day probationary period bill. So she cannot be trusted. She cannot be trusted and the education sector already knows that. 
Why then would the education sector trust that Minister to decide what the national standards are without any right of redress? That is the potentially dangerous thing about this bill. This bill gives that new Minister who has already misled the education sector once—and we are only 2 days into the new Parliament—absolute carte blanche to decide what the national standards are. This bill says that the Minister can decide them for herself and she need only gazette them. There is no select committee process no regulations review process. That is far too much power in the hands of the Minister who has already misled the education sector once. 
I have had to defend that Minister already. The education sector has been asking me what her qualifications are to be the Minister of Education. I have had to defend her already. I have said that she probably does know something about the education sector; she may not know what a vice-chancellor is or what one does but she probably did go to school—she probably did; I have had to convince some of the education sector of that. That is the Minister whom the National Government is asking the country to trust to decide what the national standards are. 
We know that this bill is being rushed through the House. 
Hon Member 
: No it isn’t. 
SUE MORONEY 
: It is being rushed through the House. How much faster could it go through the House? I ask Mrs Tolley whether it is the case that this bill will go through all stages under urgency. Is that the case—yes or no? I believe that the answer is yes. That means that neither the public nor the education sector—no one—will have the opportunity to comment on what this bill does or does not do. I think that is wrong. If education is very important and I certainly believe our children are important then we should be taking our time over this bill. We should make sure that we get it right. My children are worth it. I do not know whether the Minister thinks that my children are worth it but I believe they are. I believe that every parent in this country believes that our children are important enough to warrant our looking at this process properly. 
Members opposite should ask for public submissions find out what the teachers have to say about this bill and find out what the parents think of it. Why is the National Government so frightened to hear what the country thinks about national standards? I would like to know what parents would like to see in the national standards because I do not trust Anne Tolley to decide what our national standards are. Goodness knows what she will come up with! These are the 100 days of action of course so National has to look busy and the bill has to look like it is urgent. I would much rather have a bit of democracy and I would much rather that this new Government actually put our children first. If National members really believe that education is the key to our future then why do we not take our time over this bill to get it right? Why not listen to what people want and get other people’s views—not just the Minister’s—on what should be in the national standards? There is a lot of nervousness around the education sector about this Minister and what she believes and what she does not believe so I think the sector would want to have quite a large amount of input. 
If we are not careful we could go down the slippery slope on this issue. Systems called national standards have already been put in place in areas like the United Kingdom. I know that some people do not want us to talk about evidence-based research. Well I think evidence-based research is important because these are our children we are talking about. 
Allan Peachey 
: Oh we’ve mentioned the word “children”! 
SUE MORONEY 
: I say to Mr Peachey that we should look at the evidence. 
Allan Peachey 
: You finally mentioned the word “children”. 
SUE MORONEY 
: Mr Peachey has finally woken up. I am sorry Mr Peachey but about 3 minutes ago I talked extensively about how important this issue was for our children. Our children are our most important resource and we must get it right for them. So we must look to the evidence. I want to talk about some of the research. Dr Pita Sharples talked earlier about Te Kotahitanga. I want to put right a few misconceptions because I think he misrepresented somewhat what Te Kotahitanga is about. It is a very very good programme that was started by the Labour Government. It started in Hamilton actually. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: It was started by Professor Russell Bishop. 
SUE MORONEY 
: It was started by Professor Russell Bishop whom I visited the other day. He is about to publish a book. In it he talks about the evidence-based research on national testing and national standards. He points out that a large body of research identifies that systems that promote accountability and/or provide incentives at the expense of capacity building are systems that do not result in successful educational reform. 
Let us think about capacity building. National has told us that its whole capacity building for literacy and numeracy amounts to $18 million. That happens to be half the amount by which National is prepared to increase the funding for private schools. That is the extent of this Government’s commitment to capacity building when it comes to literacy and numeracy. So we have to be very very careful about this issue. All of the educationalists tell us that if we are going to go into the national standards area we must do it very very carefully. What is the National Government doing? It is rushing a bill through Parliament and it is not having any process by which those national standards are set. No one else gets to have input into them; the Minister decides. I certainly do not trust that Minister and what she might come up with. She has already misled the sector once in her very early days of being a Minister. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: She should know what a vice-chancellor is too. 
SUE MORONEY 
: That is right; she does need to understand what a vice-chancellor is. 
I come to the other end of the spectrum when it comes to education. Yes the compulsory education sector is very important but I believe that the fundamental area where this issue starts from is early childhood education. Increasing participation in early childhood education is an area that the Minister should be looking at and the recent Unicef report pointed us in that direction. It is not just about increased participation. 
Hon Anne Tolley 
: Who was the Government? 
SUE MORONEY 
: Well let us talk about what the Labour Government did to increase participation in early childhood education. I thank the Minister for the question. Labour provided 20 hours’ free education—20 hours’ free early childhood education which increased participation.