Mackey Moana: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Mackey Moana: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:669;Page:15984] 
MOANA MACKEY (Labour) 
: 
 Mr Chairman you do not need to sound quite so disappointed at the prospect of calling me. I promise that I will make it worthwhile. [ 
Interruption 
] This had better not be coming off my time. 
I was interested in the comments made by the member in the chair Heather Roy that the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill is a matter of principle for the ACT Party and National—that this is a matter of principle. I suspect that an alternative title for this bill might be the “Education (Freedom of Association (Are You Kidding Me?)) Amendment Bill”. We just sat through a debate on Paul Quinn’s terrible legislation his embarrassing legislation which makes us an international joke. The report under the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act was absolutely against it. The member in the chair said one of the reasons we should support this bill is that it is contrary to the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act. 
The member Hillary Calvert gave one of the most bizarre speeches I have ever heard. She said something about one of those clowns that has the ping-pong ball in its mouth and that she did not like this bill but that ACT has to support it because it is a National Government bill. 
I am talking about the “Education (Freedom of Association (Are You Kidding Me?)) Amendment Bill”. The member Heather Roy said this bill is a matter of principle; this is the title clause and it is a matter of principle. Yet the ACT Party voted in favour of a previous piece of legislation that the same principle could be applied to even though that party’s own members said they did not support it. I say to the member in the chair that when she lectures members on this side of the Chamber on principle she might want to look a little closer to home on some of those issues. 
I think the next possible title and a more appropriate title for the bill would be the “Education (Freedom of Association (We Can’t Get 10 Percent Support for This to Get a Referendum so We Will Make Parliament Intervene)) Amendment Bill”. Let us be clear; that is what happened. If students associations were such a big issue at the moment then the people who think students should have voluntary membership could get 10 percent of the student membership to say they want a referendum and it would happen. They cannot do that—they cannot do it. That was Tau Henare’s amendment and I think it is fair. But they could not do it. The “2 Percent Party” could not get 10 percent support to force a referendum so it is making Parliament intervene. How ridiculous is that? I say to the member in the chair that if she truly believes that this is something that is good for students she should go on to the campuses of New Zealand— 
Hon Heather Roy 
: I have been. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: And the member lost. That is why we are in the House debating this bill. If Heather Roy had 10 percent support—not 50 percent support not 25 percent support but 10 percent support—there would be referenda around the country on this issue. She cannot do it. She cannot even get 10 percent support so Parliament has to intervene. How ridiculous is that? 
Hon Maurice Williamson 
: They won’t be barred from joining. They can join. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: Oh I have woken up Maurice Williamson. I have woken the sleeping giant! This is incredible. 
Grant Robertson 
: You did say you would make it worthwhile. 
MOANA MACKEY 
: I did say I would make it worthwhile and I have delivered. Maurice Williamson has woken up. He is agitated. He should get on to his feet and take a call. He should not sit there like a dried arrangement. He should get on his feet take a call and have the courage of his convictions. 
Another title for this bill could be the “Education (Freedom of Association (Another National Party Broken Promise)) Amendment Bill”. In the last election campaign National MP Paul Hutchison went to the New Zealand Union of Students’ Associations conference as National’s representative. What did he say when he was asked about students association membership? He said National would not change the status quo. He promised that National would not change the status quo. The students associations took that at its word and apparently as we have found out with a lot of other things that means nothing. 
Here is another broken promise. At least the ACT Party had the courage of its convictions to campaign on this issue. The National Party promised students associations that it would not pass legislation that changed the status of students associations so this is another broken promise from the National Government. 
Another possible title which I think would be far more appropriate than the current one is the “Education (Freedom of Association (How Dare You Vote in Favour of Compulsory Student Membership)) Amendment Bill”. Waikato University went voluntary and it did not work. It decimated the Waikato students association.