Street Maryan: Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Street Maryan: Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:659;Page:8539] 
Hon MARYAN STREET (Labour) 
: 
 I rise to take a call on Part 2 of the Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill. Part 2 is a short part of the bill which covers transitional matters yet as my colleague Sue Moroney has pointed out if one looks at the detail of these clauses and at what might happen then one can see that it is entirely possible that the Minister could appoint all members of a polytechnic council if the polytechs were not geared up to do what they need to do for the purpose of these transitional clauses. 
I need to reiterate comments I have made before because they pertain to this part of the bill as much as they did to the earlier part. This is ill-thought-through; it is a part of the legislation that provides a window for polytechs to do the best they can to ensure that community representation remains on polytech councils. This is the only thing that can spur polytechs into achieving at least some modicum of community representation on their councils because the Minister cannot be guaranteed to do so. The Minister may say in the legislation that it is desirable to have Maori on polytech councils but nothing in the legislation requires that to happen or even acknowledges the purpose of polytechs and the kinds of students who look to polytechs for upskilling retraining and qualification acquisition. 
This is the technical part of this legislation which is as offensive as the substantive part in Part 1 because it simply points out that polytechs now have to ensure that the people they are now allowed to have on their councils do represent their communities so that the polytechs can have at least some semblance of remaining in touch with their communities and representing and addressing the learning needs of their communities. That is so even if it be through the Universal College of Learning which as my colleague Iain Lees-Galloway said earlier has to serve the quite different communities of Wanganui Palmerston North and Masterton. That polytechnic now has to make sure that it has a broad enough representation in only four members so that it can guarantee there is some voice for the community in the running of a major tertiary institution in its region. 
It is not good enough to have no speeches from Government members regardless of whether or not they were on the select committee. It is not good enough to have no contribution from any of those members and to have only a fatuous one from the Minister. As well as being factually incorrect it was a disgrace on every other level. The speech did not give any rationale and it did not explain the need for this legislation. So National caucus members are going like sheep to the slaughter and are simply following without demur because they have not been allowed to say anything. They are voting for legislation that is a disgrace— 
Hon Dr Wayne Mapp 
: Argh! 
Hon MARYAN STREET 
: —and that does not serve tertiary educational opportunities well I tell Dr Mapp. It does not serve skills acquisition for the future of this country well. I thought that for somebody who used to teach in the tertiary education sector that member might have had at least a passing acquaintance with skill needs and educational offerings. The transitional matters in Part 2 of this legislation are the only prompt to polytechs to get community representatives on councils quick and fast. 
The question was put that the amendment set out on Supplementary Order Paper 106 in the name of the Hon Anne Tolley to Part 2 be agreed to.