Hayes JoJO HAYES (National): Thank you Madam Chair. This is my first contribution on the Education Amendment Bill and I'm standing here. I want to support the kōrero on this side around kura hourua and partnership schools. I for the life of me cannot understand why any Government would want to get rid of a school programme and schools that are actually responding to the needs of Māori and Pasifika students that have failed within mainstream schooling. Why on earth would you want to do that Madam Chair—not bringing you into the discussion but I do not understand the thinking around the Minister's ideology around what partnership schools are doing. I do not understand that. I have talked with the teachers there I have spoken with the students—which I think is a little bit more than what the Minister has done with these schools—and the case that has actually gone for a Treaty claim it stands with great merit.So as I stand here and still wonder what on earth this bill is all about at the end of the day it seems to me that this particular bill this Education Amendment Bill is like the Government just wanting to stamp their mark on perfectly good legislation that this side of the House actually implemented and did the work on. Yes we needed to review it but really going at it slashing it to pieces isn't really the way that a Government should be behaving. I'm really disappointed in the way that this Government has approached education per se. This particular amendment bill to me just flies in the face of what this country could actually produce through its education system.So I stand I'm disappointed and I just want to make sure that the amendments in the Supplementary Order Papers that this side of the committee puts in are considered—are considered by the Minister. Without that consideration making this bill a bill that everybody in this Parliament can be proud of will not actually wipe on this side of the Chamber.My Supplementary Order Paper that I want to speak about is Supplementary Order Paper 126. It follows on from my colleague Denise Lee's around the constitution of combined councils. It's clause 14A Section 222AM amended (Constitution of combined councils)". I don't understand in this bill why the Minister must ensure that at least 50 percent but not more than 60 percent of members of the combined council are members appointed by the council. I think that this particular clause of the bill—I believe it's actually very poorly crafted. It conflates the issue of appointments to combined councils. What it also does is it puts the council—should the council opt for between 50 percent and 60 percent as soon as they go over that 50 percent mark we have an imbalance. We have an imbalance.The Minister must ensure that combined councils are evenly balanced. That's how organisations are run. There's got to be an even balance on these councils. I believe that this particular clause 14A should actually be deleted from this bill. It's not a good piece of legislation for this particular part. I think that the Minister would have too much say. I think that the Minister needs to stand up and answer why deleting clause 14A will be an issue for him. I don't think it will be an issue. I think we must make sure that our combined councils the polytechnics etc. the tertiary area will actually have their ability to be able to appoint evenly across their organisation for council members.Obviously he doesn't really have faith. He wants to have some say in there and I think that that's very unfair. I think they're very capable of being able to do this. I think it's a waste of time. I would like to see this clause in the bill clause 14A deleted from this bill—not go back there. Give the kudos to the council to the council members to be able to do the right thing to get the nice balance that they have always done in previous years. So I don't know what the Minister thinks that he needs to actually figure out."