Delahunty Catherine: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume 
Delahunty Catherine: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Sitting date: 31 May 2012. Volume:680;Page:2751. Text is incorporated into the Bound Volume.] 
5. 
CATHERINE DELAHUNTY (Green) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Does she stand by her statement that “schools will therefore be given a guarantee that their staffing entitlement will not be reduced by more than two full-time teacher equivalents over the next three years”? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA (Minister of Education) 
: 
 Talofa lava. Tena koutou. I stand by my full statement where I said: “Schools will … be given a guarantee that their staffing entitlement will not be reduced by more than two full-time teacher equivalents over the next 3 years as a result of the policy changes.” 
Catherine Delahunty 
: Given her admission this week that the Ministry of Education’s modelling for technology staffing levels was flawed will she guarantee that schools that have been given a stay of execution will not lose up to seven teachers at the end of the 3 years? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: I have not suggested that the ministry’s modelling was flawed and no I will not give a guarantee beyond 3 years. We are focused on raising quality in schools for all students over the next 3 years. 
Tracey Martin 
: Can the Minister tell us how much of the money saved by increasing public school class sizes will be redirected to the investigation setting up and running of charter schools which has become policy only since a former National Cabinet Minister became the leader of the ACT Party?  
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: The money that has been saved as a result of the changes we are making which are to focus on investing in quality so that student achievement can be raised is being reinvested in quality for all schools and for all students and for all types of schools that will perform for them.  
Catherine Delahunty 
: Given that the modelling around technology teachers was flawed has she checked whether the ministry’s formula for staffing is flawed in any other way? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: I reject the presumption in that question. 
Catherine Delahunty 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked whether she had checked something and I did not get an answer as to whether she had.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! If the member wanted—[ 
Interruption 
] Order! If the member wanted that question answered she should not have put the first part into her question. She said “Given that the staffing model was flawed”. The Minister disputed that part of the question and that is perfectly within the Standing Orders.  
Catherine Delahunty 
: How will her new staffing formula working party come up with useful staffing solutions when the schools most affected including the New Zealand Association of Intermediate and Middle Schools have announced just today that they will not participate in a group set up to axe their staff? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: The sector working group that has been set up is not focused on axing staff; it is focused on how we can ensure the continuation of the provision of a quality technology curriculum. It is focused on whether there are any unintended impacts and how we might mitigate those and it is in the context of providing a guarantee that schools will be protected from losing any more than two full-time teacher equivalents because our focus is on raising quality to raise student achievement for all New Zealand students.  
Catherine Delahunty 
: Will her working party listen to children like 9-year-old Jade Christensen of Tauranga who wrote to her yesterday saying: “We have enough resources to help us learn and play sports. I think this one-on-one time with teachers is much much much more important.”? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: Look we are very focused on how we raise achievement for all students. That is why we are working with the professional leadership of the sector. That is why we are providing assurance to parents who may have been anxious. That is why the conversation is with professional leaders and with parents. 
Catherine Delahunty 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Is this a point of order? The member must be called for a point of order.  
Catherine Delahunty 
: I asked the Minister whether she would listen to Jade’s points. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: If I remember correctly the member asked whether the Minister would consult with students. If I remember correctly that was the question—and the Minister did not actually answer that. The member went on to “such as” so there was only one question and the one question was whether the Minister would consult the students and I think it probably should be answered.  
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: As I recall the question it was whether I would consult a 9-year-old student about changes. My answer was that we are working with the professional leadership of schools and we are assuring parents of what our commitment is and that is to provide quality for all students of whatever age they are.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Before I call the member again what is helpful is to actually answer a question though. I mean what the Minister has told the House is what the Minister wants to do but the questioner asked whether the Minister would do a particular thing and the Minister has basically ignored that. That is the dilemma at question time because that is what causes members to raise points of order—if their questions have not been answered. The question was dead simple. It asked whether the Minister would consult students such as a 9-year-old student. It would be very easy to say “No we are not doing that; we are doing this.” and the Minister did not do that.  
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: All right. We are listening to the concerns raised by all New Zealanders—students parents professional leaders alike. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thank the Minister.  
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I apologise. I think that yesterday and today your interventions have been helpful. I know that with technology developments we now get simultaneous interpretation of the Maori language and I wonder whether you would look at a service where you could do that for certain Ministers on an ongoing basis. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: No. Order!  
Catherine Delahunty 
: When she told schools like Papatoetoe Intermediate School which will lose seven teachers in 3 years’ time that it was their choice how they cut staff did she consider increasing class sizes to 40 or cutting technology altogether a fair choice?  
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: Successive Governments have provided a funding formula to schools. It is based on a number of aspects and responsibilities. Then the professional leadership of a school makes the decision as to how it will deliver the national curriculum— 
Catherine Delahunty 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. My question was whether she considered that a fair choice.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: In fairness to the Minister the Minister was actually explaining there how it will work and that is relevant to the question asked because depending on how it will work there may be other choices. I think that on this particular occasion the member is trying to pin the Minister down to an unreasonable position. I think it is not unreasonable that the Minister should explain how it will work which was what the Minister was doing.  
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: As I have explained it is the policy of successive Governments that the Government funds on a formula to schools in order that those schools can make determinations about how they will deliver their curriculum according to the specifics of their circumstances. Those include who the students enrolled at their schools are and what the particular interests of their community are as reflected by their boards of trustees.  
Chris Hipkins 
: Is it current policy for the teacher-pupil ratios for years 7 and 8 to increase at the end of the 3-year cap to 1:27.5 as she announced on 16 May up from 1:23.36 as it is presently?  
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: As I announced yesterday the impact of the ratio change was not intended to have an effect to the extreme that we have heard anxieties raised about and as a result of that we have guaranteed that all schools that are in the 10 percent that may experience an effect greater than two will be funded up to two full-time teacher equivalents.  
Chris Hipkins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I think you probably know what my point of order is going to be. The question I asked was what would happen at the end of the 3-year cap—whether the ratios that she announced on 16 May would apply from the time the cap ceased. She has talked about what is going to happen while the cap is in place.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is a fair point of order. The question did ask what would happen at the end of the period of the cap applying.  
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: This provision is over the next 3 years during which time we would expect to see student achievement raised which is the whole point of this policy. We will be reviewing this over the next 3 years and there are a number of Budgets between now and then that will allow us with relevant timely information to make that decision at that point.  
Chris Hipkins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Once again the question that I asked was whether it was current policy for teacher-pupil ratios in years 7 and 8 to increase at the end of the 3-year cap to 1:27.5 which was the ratio the Minister has announced. She still has not actually addressed that primary part—in fact the only part—of the question.  
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I think in fairness the Minister has answered that those decisions will be made as the policy progresses and the Government reflects on the changes in student achievement that are achieved. [ 
Interruption 
] Oh no in fairness—the member should not be interjecting while I am ruling on a point of order anyhow. He has been getting a fair bit of licence and maybe he should bring his interjections and points of order back a bit. I think that was not an unreasonable answer. The member asked about something 3 years out and the Minister said the Government will make those decisions as it sees the impact of the policy develop. That is an answer to the question. That is not an unreasonable answer to the question. 
Chris Hipkins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. The issue that we have is that I asked about the effect of current policy. Government policy changes— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! I have listened to the member long enough. I think the member is trying my patience a little too far. The member is just playing with words. Had the member been a Minister he might know this but to say “current policy” is actually irrelevant. The Government has made some decisions and the Minister has said it wants to see the impact of those decisions before it decides a situation in 3 years’ time. To argue that there should be some current Government policy about it as the member is I think is being unreasonable. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Supplementary question Catherine Delahunty. [ 
Interruption 
] Is it a point of order or a supplementary question? 
Catherine Delahunty 
: No it is a supplementary question. I was just checking with my colleague—I could not hear him. Given the failed modelling in the technology staffing formulas will she agree to a moratorium on all staffing changes until schools and parents have been consulted and she actually knows how many teachers are really needed? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: I reject the presumption that that question is predicated on. 
Chris Hipkins 
: Will the cap that she has announced limiting the number of teachers any school may lose as a result of the ratio changes apply only to teachers who are lost as a result of the ratio changes or will the cap also extend to include positions that may be lost as a result of the consequent changes to classroom release time and management staffing allocations? 
Hon HEKIA PARATA 
: What I have announced is that we will provide a guarantee that no school will lose more than two full-time teacher equivalents as a result of the policy changes. 
Chris Hipkins 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. That to some extent addresses the question but does not actually answer the wider issue which is that when we are talking about full-time teacher equivalents we are talking about the funding formula for schools. There is an additional funding formula around management positions and classroom release time which is additional to that and she has not— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I hear the member’s point and I accept the veracity of the question asked but I believe that an answer was given in that the Minister has told the House that the maximum full-time teacher equivalent loss from the policy change will be two full-time teacher equivalents—that being the total impact of the policy change. That has answered the member’s question. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Thank you for the interpretation. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: There is no interpretation. The member should not interject. There is no interpretation. That is what the Minister said. 
Catherine Delahunty 
: I seek leave to table an email from Jade Christensen aged 9 saying they need more teachers—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Order! The member is entitled to seek leave to have a document tabled. 
Catherine Delahunty 
: I seek leave to table an email to the Minister from Jade Christensen aged 9 saying that more one-to-one teachers are needed in her school. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection.