Curran ClareHon CLARE CURRAN (Labour—Dunedin South): Thank you Madam Assistant Speaker. I'm pleased to take a short call on the third reading of the Education Amendment Bill (No 2) in this thankfully third reading speech trying to inject some sensible evidence-based discussion into the debate on a couple of points.I have listened with increasing dismay. I've actually listened very carefully to the language being used by the Opposition on this bill: we're ideological; they're pragmatic. And yet what it seems to be when you boil it all down what the guts of their opposition is to this bill is that they're miffed. They're miffed that the bad law and bad policy decisions are being unwound. I remember in her second reading speech the Hon Tracey Martin said that we're not unwinding everything that the previous Government did only the bad bits. So what this bill does is unwind the bad bits. Nikki Kaye particularly is quite miffed about that in her—as I wrote down when she was giving her speech earlier on—frenzied Orwellian opposition which runs counter to the actual evidence-based approach that this Government is taking to it. So what this bill does is it improves the quality of the New Zealand education system it marks the end—and this is where the miffed bit comes in—of a previous era and it's a new approach to maintain the integrity of the public and of our education system.So quickly with regards to the cohort entry I won't go over all of the details of what that does but what I do want to emphasise is the evidence-based approach that it's consistent. So the Government frankly—and I think the public agrees—does not consider that children under the age of five years should be attending school. It's too young and it can be damaging which is consistent with the position taken by that Advisory Group on Early Learning in 2015 and both the New Zealand Principals' Federation and the Institute for Early Childhood Studies at Victoria University of Wellington—that auspicious organisation—among others expressed support for putting the school starting age back to five years of age. An evidence-based approach is very important.On the requirement on the new registration criterion for private schools requiring them to be physically and emotionally safe places for children again—and I won't labour the point—this was an issue where the Opposition opposed for the sake of opposing it couldn't really come up with a reason why but said that somehow it wasn't necessary. What officials told us is that there is a gap in the law that needs to be fixed which is what this piece of legislation does. It's important that we've got a safe environment and examples were given—ASSISTANT SPEAKER (Poto Williams): I apologise to the member. I've set the clock up for a 10-minute speech so you've got one-minute left.Hon CLARE CURRAN: Thanks Madam Assistant Speaker. The current provisions in the Education Act 1989 do not enable the Secretary for Education to consider student safety when considering private school registration applications or to effectively respond to concerns about student safety through means other than suspension after they've been registered. Inserting the new registration criteria would give the Secretary for Education the power to take remedial actions proportionate to the issue if there's a concern that a private school is not a safe place for students. Well if that's not a gap in the law that needs to be fixed I don't know what is.This Government is preserving the integrity of our education system based on sensible and pragmatic evidence with a belief system and a set of values.