Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Pillay Lynne: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:625;Page:20042] 
4.  
LYNNE PILLAY (Labour—Waitakere) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: What reports if any has he received on possible changes to education funding? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister of Education) 
: 
 I have seen a report advocating the reintroduction of bulk funding for schools. Under the proposal targeted funding for things like teacher professional development literacy and numeracy programmes and teaching resources would be eliminated. School boards would have to negotiate their own employment agreements with teachers and the only extra funding would be available through wage cuts. Schools that got into financial difficulty would be cut adrift and their students abandoned by the Government. Those approaches which are so last millennium come from Don Brash. 
Lynne Pillay 
: What feedback has he received on the proposed reintroduction of bulk funding? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I would like to quote someone who is an eminent former secondary principal. He stated: “If bulk funding of teacher salaries is imposed on boards of trustees and the teaching profession I believe it could be the most divisive and possibly the most destructive change in our education system.” That eminent former principal of Hamilton Boys High School is Tony Steel the ex-National member for Hamilton East. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister confirm the statements behind the paper from the Post Primary Teachers Association (PPTA) titled  
Bulk Funding: a Retrospective 
 which stated: “The Minister of Education Trevor Mallard insisted that the ‘flexibility’ that bulk-funded schools had come to expect had to be retained … The solution was to allow schools to continue the practice of employing teachers from the operations grant.” and can he confirm that New Zealand schools currently employ thousands of individual teachers from their operations grant; what is the difference and why is he against that? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: What I can confirm is that the PPTA agreement is in fact a minimum rate document. Teachers can be paid more than that if schools choose to do it and many many schools do. But I can also confirm that there is considerable doubt about this recent proposal. I note from the speech of Don Brash that the copy has been issued with all his doubts in it. For instance: “Bill what value will these have?” and “Check with Bill. Is this really greatly different from what happens now?” asked Don Brash. I will just say that until those members can do information and communications technology they cannot do education. 
Bernie Ogilvy 
: Does the Minister agree that one potential problem with giving outwardly successful schools complete control of funding as trust schools is that they may become personal fiefdoms under a charismatic principal and that in the case of a school like Cambridge High School the inability of educational authorities to intervene would be disastrous? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The member has a point although I would have thought that Te Wananga o Aotearoa run by Don Brash’s mate would be a better example of that. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Would the member please withdraw that last comment about mates. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I withdraw. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. Although you have asked Mr Mallard to withdraw for making that scurrilous and totally untrue allegation in the House I think that it is a light punishment for him to simply stand up and say: “I withdraw.” The reality is that he has just lied to the House. He should be dealt with in a much harsher way than the simple request that he withdraw a comment. 
Hon Dr Michael Cullen 
: The member did in fact withdraw and the other member Mr Brownlee has accused the Minister of lying. That member cannot accuse a Minister of lying in this House. I would suggest to you that he now has to withdraw and apologise. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I had ruled on the point of order. The member had withdrawn. I now have a separate situation whereby one member has called the other a liar. That is not acceptable. I would ask him to withdraw that comment. 
Gerry Brownlee 
: I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. It was inappropriate to call the Minister a liar because of the Standing Orders that we operate under. I think it is appropriate though to say that he was being extremely reckless with the truth. 
Hon Dr Nick Smith 
: Noting Mr Trevor Mallard’s comments about bulk funding I seek the leave of the House to table the  
Hansard 
 of the third reading debate on the Education Act 1989 which made bulk funding compulsory for every school and for which Michael Cullen and Helen Clark voted. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Is there any objection to the tabling of that document? Yes there is. The document will not be tabled. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Madam Speaker. I note that Mr Mallard seemed to quote from a document albeit a draft document. As is traditional he should therefore table that document because we all need a good laugh. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: I do not think that is a serious point of order. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: It is very hard to describe the document as an official one and therefore I have to seek the leave of the House to table it. I so do. 
Madam SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that document. Is there any objection? There is objection so it will not be tabled. 
Hon Bill English 
: I seek leave to table a paper from the Post Primary Teachers Association entitled  
Bulk Funding: a Retrospective 
 which cites Trevor Mallard as advising schools to pay teachers out of their operational funds in order to keep the flexibility. 
Document by leave laid on the Table of the House.