Mallard Trevor: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
Mallard Trevor: Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill — First Reading 
[Volume:620;Page:16195] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
 on behalf of the Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education) 
: 
 I move  
That the Education (Establishment of Universities) Amendment Bill be now read a first time. 
 It is my intention to move at the appropriate time that the bill be referred to the Education and Science Committee for consideration and that the committee present a final report on the bill by Thursday 16 December 2004. 
The bill is small and is designed to clarify and streamline the processes for determining whether a university should be established. At the moment the Education Act 1989 requires that two substantive tests must both be worked through before the Minister can make any recommendation to the Governor-General about the establishment of a university or other tertiary institution. The first test is a set of relevant academic characteristics set out in the Act. This is a very detailed and resource-intensive stage. The second test was introduced as part of the recent reforms to the tertiary education system that were contained in the Education (Tertiary Reform) Amendment Act 2002. This test requires the Minister to satisfy himself or herself as to whether the establishment of the institution is in the interests of the tertiary education system and of the nation as a whole. The Minister must also consult with tertiary institutions organisations representing tertiary institutions and other relevant bodies. 
All of these steps must be carried out before the Minister can make a decision and regardless of whether it is clear that a proposal would fail on one or other count. This means that the Minister must ask the Qualifications Authority to devote resources to considering the academic criteria even if the Minister had decided that the proposal was not in the interests of the tertiary education system and the nation. This risks diverting unnecessarily the Qualifications Authority away from its core role of ensuring the quality of qualifications and education provision and I think members know that it has its hands full in that particular area. The Government does not believe that a process should be allowed to operate in a way that potentially wastes scarce resources of both the authority and the institution making the application. 
The bill proposes that for universities the high-level strategic issues should be addressed first. The bill means that only if the Minister were satisfied on national interest grounds would the Qualifications Authority look at whether a particular institution was up to the mark in terms of the academic criteria for establishment as a university. The bill also makes some amendments that align the process used for allowing the use of certain terms with the establishment provisions for tertiary institutions. 
I think it is important that I draw the attention of the House to one further element of the bill. Clause 6 does have an element of retrospectivity as it provides that any Order in Council to establish a university made after the bill has been introduced is deemed not to have been made unless the Minister states that the criteria and process contained in the bill have been met and followed. This approach is necessary to ensure that the process set out in the bill is used from now on and for any proposals that are current. 
I know that there will be some interest in how the bill affects the request made some time ago by Unitec for university status. When the Government introduced a bill in 2000 my Associate Minister noted that it was hard on Unitec and that the delay caused by the bill was regrettable. The Government’s view was that the priority was to develop a widely shared clear strategic direction for New Zealand’s tertiary education sector. I can give a number of undertakings in relation to Unitec’s request. First I can assure the House that Unitec’s request will be dealt with on its merits. Second I undertake that Ministers and the Tertiary Education Commission as well as the Qualifications Authority if it is required will engage with Unitec and other interested parties such as the Vice-Chancellors Committee about the best way forward. Clearly there are alternative routes for dealing with the matter. 
To conclude the bill represents a minor refinement of the architecture of the Government’s reforms of the tertiary education system that are better aligning tertiary education with New Zealand’s wider goals for social and economic development. It is minor. It is a sensible approach to clarifying and improving a resource-intensive process and I commend the bill to the House.