Parmar ParmjeetDr PARMJEET PARMAR (National): Thank you Madam Speaker for this opportunity. I'm taking this call to oppose this legislation. We have been very clear about our concerns from the day this legislation was introduced and during the select committee process yes I acknowledge changes have been made to this legislation but still this legislation does not address concerns that were raised by us when it was introduced before the House.The member who just resumed her seat Jan Tinetti said that there were some solutions needed to fix the polytech sector. I acknowledge that but this is not the solution that we need. Just going in single-handed and bringing in a centralised approach is not going to fix the polytech sector. The polytech sector is also suffering because of the policies of the current Labour Government because of their stance towards immigration because of their stance towards international students. We know that there are several polytechs that have students already enrolled but they are still overseas because they cannot come to New Zealand to fill those empty seats.So there are several polytechs suffering because of the policies of the current Government and then this Government thought OK let's do something" and came up with this reform which is a disastrous I would say reform in the tertiary education sector in the past 30 years—the past 30 years. This is not actually going to solve any problem in the vocational education and training sector; actually it's going to create more problems because these polytechs are struggling already—and with later on amalgamation and other changes the transition to the new system they'll be struggling even more.From day one we have said that loss of jobs is a big concern for us with this legislation. Building capability in any sector takes several years. We need those people in the tertiary education sector. But with this reform I fear that we are going to lose that capability and then it will be up to us when we come back into Government after the 19 September to restart again and build that capability to support our vocational education sector. I think that this is actually going to be a big loss for our workforce that is already there in the vocational education and training sector and we cannot afford that.During the select committee process as I said changes were made. I want to acknowledge all submitters. It's because of their concerns that they expressed in the select committee process that changes to the legislation have been made. But of course there were other concerns expressed by submitters that were not taken fully into account which I will touch on later on. I want to thank all the 236 submitters—those who submitted—and I also want to acknowledge the 71 submitters who appeared before the Education and Workforce Committee. Of these 236 submitters the majority of submitters were individuals—148 individuals submitted; 19 submissions were received from unions; nine submissions from industry training organisations; nine from institutes of technology and polytechnics; and 41 from representatives and other peak bodies. I'm really really grateful to all these submitters.But then because of the pressure on the select committee to report back this legislation as it was stated to be reported back we had to sit in subcommittees. This is very important legislation and for us in Opposition all our education spokespeople wanted to be on the select committee to hear from these submitters but they didn't get the opportunity because we were sitting in subcommittees. Some submitters also were wondering why we had only so few members on the select committee. So we had to explain that to those submitters. So it would have been really nice to get enough time to work on this legislation in the select committee process especially to have had all members of the select committee have the opportunity to hear from these submitters.Now as we have just heard from the Minister there is going to be a Supplementary Order Paper to address some other concerns. So we can see that this process is a very very rushed process and anything to do with students and the future of our country should not be rushed like this. But this Government doesn't care because it's all about this Government's agenda to push this through. This process of pushing it through the select committee process by putting the time line which didn't work with the number of submitters that we had—we had to sit in subcommittees—works only for the Government. It doesn't work for submitters; it doesn't work for members especially Opposition members on the select committee.As I said yes changes were made. I want to acknowledge that. The other change that I want to acknowledge in the select committee process as I have said before is that the redundancy conditions for workers is something that we have been talking about from day one from the day this legislation was introduced. That was addressed during the select committee process because as the legislation was introduced it was overriding the Employment Relations Act for workers that would be made redundant. The speaker before me Jan Tinetti said that it was about workers that will be transitioned from workforce development councils (WDC) to the New Zealand Institute of Skills and Technology (NZIST). It's not just about that. We know that some New Zealand Qualifications Authority staff will also be losing their jobs because their responsibilities will be transferred to WDCs.The other issue that was addressed during the select committee process which I want to touch on briefly is academic freedom. This was actually a big concern expressed by several submitters and it was important that it was addressed in the select committee process and that it was clarified because with WDCs the workforce development councils having that kind of overarching leadership role it appeared that they will have full control of that; so that local freedom academic freedom was lost as the legislation was proposed.So I want to acknowledge these changes and several other changes which were made in the select committee process but still the approach that this legislation takes is the problem. The approach of this legislation is to reform this vocational education system by bringing in a centralised model. That doesn't work and we are quite concerned about that centralised model because that centralised model takes away that localism takes away that regional autonomy and we really want to see that that regional autonomy and that localism is maintained because if you're talking about supplying a skilled people to local industries we have to know what those local industries need. So that's why that localism is important and National is quite concerned about that. We will restore that localism in our vocational education and training.As we have just heard from the member who resumed her seat she talked about there being no opportunity for industry to provide their input in the current system. And actually industry said that they are not supportive of these changes. I don't know what kind of industry she was talking about. We know the Tertiary Education Commission is not supportive of these changes. Treasury is not supportive of these changes. So the Government is just pushing it through wanting to look like they're trying to fix the polytech sector. They're not going to fix the polytech sector with this. Actually they're going to create more problems in the polytech sector.With workforce development councils in regard to that there were several submissions. Those submitters said that they were concerned about the disestablishment of ITOs—industry training organisations—but that concern is out of the scope of this legislation. So there were several concerns that came through during the select committee process. They were put in that category of "out of scope". So how can we say that everybody was heard and that each and every concern has been taken into account in this legislation? It hasn't been—it hasn't been.Going to the point of localism I want to bring this to everybody's attention: there were more submitters those who supported localism who didn't support a centralised model and there were fewer submitters who supported that. Fifteen submitters were opposed to that centralised NZIST model which is being proposed through this legislation. Only three submitters supported that centralised model. So that is very clear and we are very confident in our position. We are opposing this legislation because we truly believe that this legislation is actually going to create more struggle for the vocational education sector. Thank you Madam Speaker."