English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:625;Page:20048] 
7.  
Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Can he confirm that between the 1999-2000 Budget and the 2004-05 Budget spending in Vote Education on administration of education regulations has nearly quadrupled spending on policy advice has increased by 63 percent and spending on administration of education sector resourcing has doubled? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 There have been across-the-board increases in education expenditure since Labour became the Government and we are now third in the OECD in school expenditure as a percentage of GDP. Specific departmental as opposed to school increases have included some things that are technical issues. For example there have been major property revaluations which have resulted in increased capital charges and depreciation. Some of the matters have not been technical such as the $153 million relating to services to students with special needs and $10 million relating to early childhood departmental payments. I tell Mr English that that is in the departmental area. 
Hon Bill English 
: What benefit have students and parents received from the following increases in Ministry of Education spending: $18 more per year on policy advice $10 million more per year on the administration of education regulations $37 million more per year on the administration of education sector resourcing and in particular $2 million more per year on ministerial servicing? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: One of the things that this Government has done is to be transparent in the area of spending. The fact that we are straightforward and honest about what is spent is why we are doing so well in the polls and the Opposition is in free fall as will be shown tonight. 
Helen Duncan 
: Has he seen any proposals to do away with any particular elements of education funding? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Yes. I have seen a suggestion that the entire allocation for teacher professional development and curriculum support should be scrapped. That would affect thousands of teachers who are benefiting from professional development aimed at improving how they teach maths reading and writing with the ultimate benefits going to the kids they teach. There would be no laptops for teachers no programmes aimed at reducing truancy no high-speed Internet access no software licences and no help for gifted children. That is the policy of the National Party. 
Hon Bill English 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. You have drawn to Ministers’ attention before that they do not have ministerial responsibility for National Party policy. In that case this Minister cannot have such responsibility because that is absolutely not National’s policy no matter how often he repeats it. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: The Minister was asked to comment on any reports. Although he is not responsible for National’s policy he did name the report so the answer came within the scope of the question. The Minister did not assert a responsibility for that policy. 
Bernie Ogilvy 
: Does the Minister agree that one way of cutting down on education bureaucracy would be to merge the three agencies concerned with educational quality—that is the New Zealand Qualifications Authority the Education Review Office and the New Zealand Teachers Council—into a new educational standards authority which would also help to reduce the compliance costs facing schools; if not why not? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The member has consulted with the Minister of State Services who has some experience in this area. Unfortunately sometimes one and one and one actually cost four rather than two and a half. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister confirm that the funding for the core activities of the Ministry of Education now costs $132 million more per year than when he became the Minister which means that for every $1 that he has put into school operations grants he has put $1 into more bureaucracy? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: That is absolutely incorrect. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister answer the question this time that I asked earlier—that is what value do parents and students get from the following increases in Ministry of Education expenditure: $18 million more per year on policy advice $10 million more per year on the administration of education regulations and $37 million more per year on the administration of education sector resourcing; what did any of that do for any of our students? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I know it was the policy of the previous National Government to have under-resourced and unregulated schools and we saw the results slipping away as a result of its policy. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Could the Minister address the question that was raised more specifically. It made reference to increases. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: This Government believes for example that we should have property resourced properly. We have put a lot of money into that and spent— 
Hon Bill English 
: I didn’t mention property. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: Well the member did mention resourcing. What the hell does he think property is if it is not a resource? [ 
Interruption 
] 
Hon Bill English 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. It is one of the conventions of this House that members do not issue threats to other members in an attempt to influence them. Mr Mallard just pointed at me across the House and said loudly: “You’re gone.” That is out of order. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I was referring to a number of National members at the next election. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: If the member would just withdraw his comment please we can then move forward. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I withdraw. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Yesterday you were extremely stern—and in fact over the last couple of days—and required a Minister in the case of Annette King and a party leader in the case of the Rt Hon Winston Peters to leave the House for exactly the sort of exchange that Mr Mallard attempted to engage in. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That exchange was before and not during that point of order. But I do want the Minister please to rise and withdraw that comment and to apologise if the member took offence. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I withdraw and apologise. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I think you have missed my point. Mr Mallard did exactly what Mrs King did. On the other hand Mr English showed considerable restraint given the provocation from Mr Mallard. If there is to be the convention that there is not that byplay across the House before after or during questions Mr Mallard should be asked to remove himself from the House. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: I heard and saw exactly what happened. After the answer was finished in the time in between when no questions were being asked Mr English first said “You’re pathetic.” which was itself out of order because it was in the second person. Then for some peculiar reason after Mr Mallard said “You’re gone.” Mr English felt that that was being a bully. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: That was my recollection as well. It was not during the actual giving of the point of order. Could we please move on.