Lee DeniseClauses 1 to 3DENISE LEE (National—Maungakiekie): Kei te whakamana au i Te Reo Māori mō te kaupapa i tēnei wā.[I wish to honour our current focus on Māori language.]I would like to refer to an amendment in the name of Nikki Kaye and it is in regard to the commencement date. The commencement clause of the bill in its current form states that this bill comes into force the day after the date on which it receives Royal assent. However I'm supporting this particular amendment in the name of the Hon Nikki Kaye that changes the commencement date to 1 January 2020.The reason for my support is that this amendment is based on the fact that the Minister of Education is clearly trying to make some changes happen overnight. The self-imposed time line of this bill states that elections must be held at least four months before members take office. So if you're going off that it means that the earliest possible—I've done the calculations—time that the new Teaching Council would be able to be formed and this would be as it is drafted would be late January to early February next year. Now that's only four months to get things up and running but at least it's a little bit of time for the current organisation to plan and prepare for this major transition—something's better than nothing. But what the Minister's done is introduce Supplementary Order Paper 94 that would exempt the first election from this four-month requirement. So why would that be? The only reason to do that possibly—this is my calculation—is that he wants the newly elected Teaching Council up and running before Christmas before the New Year. Now that is simply not enough time. The bill proposes a huge change to the structure of the Education Council and it is a structure that is so far-reaching in its implications for the profession stakeholders day-to-day operations and the governance of the organisation that it deserves a really good look and that's what the amendment is doing. Changes can't be made overnight. It's not possible. So we should look at that commencement date really closely to make sure that all those impacted by these changes can adequately prepare. They've got to do the grunt work after all and make sure that the changes—despite our opposition to change in the first place—can be carried out and that there be no unnecessary cost and also complications around the scale and the size of the change. I've got three reasons that I would like to outline as to why the commencement date should be as the Hon Nikki Kaye has suggested 1 January 2020. The first is that the Teaching Council itself has to make rules around the nomination and the election process. They're tasked with doing it. They have to plan—really important—how to increase participation in those voting and getting involved in the election because we know historically that participation has been incredibly low. I think someone has used the figure of 13 percent and that's going to take some time for the council to figure out how to get that participation up.The second reason is that we know that the changes proposed will cost $700000 over three years. That is a massive massive bill. If we delay the commencement it might lessen the financial burden of that particular change. I'm not sure it will but hey we could give it some time to see whether in fact the financial cost could come down. Proper planning time might result in a cheaper outcome and I don't mean cheap in a figurative sense; I mean it in a literal sense. It is perhaps time for where alternatives can be found. Just on my point two before I get to point three it's also going to spread out potentially—if we go to the commencement date of 2020—the cost over time meaning of course less of a financial burden for the organisation.My reason three and then I would like to with your indulgence Madam Chair head on to one comment around the title—I'm on commencement now. So my third reason around commencement is that there is such a lack of clarity. There is a real distinct lack of clarity and direction in the education sector at the moment. The reason why we need adequate time to head into that—if this passes—change and what that change would look like for the Education Council is around that lack of clarity and direction. The Government currently has by my calculation 14 different reviews going on in the education sector.Hon Nikki Kaye: 19DENISE LEE: 19 sorry—19. I'm being corrected. There are 19 reviews currently taking place in the education sector. The bill has not taken into account in the commencement date the significant changes that may result from these 19 reviews. Commencement should not occur until we know the result of these reviews until we have some certainty about what the education sector is going to look like and then we might have a better idea of the proper place of the Teaching Council which is a fundamental factor in when the Teaching Council—should this pass—should get into gear and be action ready. Do they even know what the education sector in a broad sense is going to look like? I would argue they certainly don't because there are 19 reviews going on at the moment.Now Madam Chair with your indulgence I would like to switch to the title. I find it really interesting—so I'm not speaking to a Supplementary Order Paper in this regard but I'm making a general comment about the title. I find it fascinating that back in the first reading Tracey Martin from New Zealand First made some very definitive comments about the title. With your indulgence I'd like to read from Hansard from the first reading but it relates to the title here for the purposes of this afternoon. She said New Zealand First has an issue with this bill. The bill was originally drawn as a member's bill from the ballot. It perfectly matches what New Zealand First campaigned on what the Green Party campaigned on and what the Labour Party campaigned on except for the name [the title]. The Minister of Education understands that and it's a conversation a topic that has been discussed. At the moment it is the Education (Teaching Council of Aotearoa) Amendment Bill 2017." Here's where she gets strong and you can just sense the intonation in her voice: "We will lobby and we understand we can work constructively with the Minister of Education to amend the title to this bill to 'Education (Teachers Council of Aotearoa'"—wait for it—"'New Zealand)'".This is the sum total of New Zealand First's contribution to the education sector of New Zealand. They want to insert the term "New Zealand" in the title. She made a very specific point in the first reading that she was lobbying the Minister that there were discussions going on inside and outside the office—who knows where?—that they lobbied strong and hard to contribute to the education sector. And their contribution is what? "New Zealand". Thank you very much New Zealand First. You are engaging in the deep and meaningful as we speak. Madam Chair thank you very much."