Peachey Allan: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Peachey Allan: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:676;Page:21524] 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
: 
 As the member who chaired the Education and Science Committee hearings into the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill I want to acknowledge the role played by select committee members from all sides of the House. It was a positive engagement and we engaged very very well with the submitters as well. It was a long process at times a demanding one but everybody performed very very well and I believe that if nothing else this process was a tribute to the way the parliamentary system can and should work. I should acknowledge the work of the member Heather Roy. This is a big day for her in her parliamentary career. I think it is regrettable that she is leaving Parliament. She has certainly with the assistance of her colleagues earned this success. 
At the end of the day it should surprise nobody that National is supporting this bill. The National Party is a party that believes in choice and personal responsibility. It is those two concepts that I want to concentrate on for a few minutes. The first one is choice. 
Throughout all of the hearings in subsequent public statements and in a lot of things that I have heard the Labour Party say Labour members have talked about compulsory students association membership enhancing choice. I hope that finally one of the Labour speakers might be able to explain that to me because I am really struggling with the concept that forcing young people into being denied a right that all other New Zealand citizens have—freedom of association—can in any way enhance the choices of young people. I just cannot figure that one out I am afraid. 
It seems to me that choice comes down to the opportunity not to be required by law to join an organisation simply because we attend an institution and not to have to go through an elaborate and often frustrating process to get an exemption from that. That just does not seem to me to be choice and it does not in my view pay tribute to the ability of youngsters embarking on tertiary education. Whether to join a students union is a choice that they are capable of making themselves. They do not need legislation passed by this Parliament to force them into joining something. That should be their choice and this legislation gives them that choice. 
My second point is about personal responsibility. A lot of people who support this bill contacted members like me. They did not make submissions to the select committee but they made their views known. I found myself balancing out two things. 
The first was the fact that people said to me—and I am bound to say that it is a view for which I have a lot of respect—that they would take responsibility for themselves. They said that if they got into trouble with the university or if they wanted to appeal something they would take responsibility for that. If they had a health issue they would take responsibility for that. Let us face it: if these young people are capable of studying at tertiary level they are capable of exercising that sort of choice for themselves. 
Then there was the other point of view which basically said that no people might get into trouble and the committee was presented with a number of interesting stories about some people who did need the help of the students associations. But then we ask ourselves whether every student in New Zealand except for those who go to Auckland University should have to fund what may be a bit of an insurance scheme. I found myself asking why some people were at university if they did not have the capability to take personal responsibility and keep their lives in order. 
I found myself balancing up those two things and constantly referring back to my previous career and the young people I knew who were going off to university. Frankly my view very strongly was that they should not be going off to university if they were not able to exercise personal responsibility for themselves. 
During the hearings and in all the meetings I had with student leaders I came to respect highly the presidents and co-presidents of the students associations. Often the arguments that they put to me were reasonable and fair. I did not always agree with them and clearly they were motivated to protect compulsory unionism. I expected that and I would like to say to those young people first of all that I enjoyed our contact. It took me back to a previous life that I thoroughly enjoyed. But it also brought home to me something else and it was that those young people by and large were of such ability that I believe they are more than capable of running a voluntary student union that will be capable of providing the services that a significant number of students will be prepared to buy into. 
There is another message in all of this for students. They are now being given the choice to exercise personal responsibility and the choice to ask themselves a basic question: if they join a student union will the student union provide them with the services and support they might need or will they back themselves to exercise their personal responsibility in a different way and take care of themselves? 
I pay tribute to the ability of those young people and I repeat that I enjoyed my contact with them. I realise that for them this will be a disappointing day but I hope that students will also see this as an opportunity because students are being granted at last freedom of association which has not been denied to other New Zealanders for a long long time. 
I repeat the comment I made earlier. I would like a member of the Labour Party to explain how compulsion enhances choice. And I say to student leaders that they should not have expectations that Labour will somehow overturn this legislation or repeal it because that will not happen. It is unrealistic to think that it will. It is just not possible for a party that has committed itself to voluntary unionism in every other aspect of life to deny that to students but that is beside the point. 
If at the end of this debate one of the Opposition members can explain to me how compulsion enhances choice I will be delighted. Thank you.