English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers Questions to Members 
[Volume:619;Page:14933] 
3.  
Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Why will the Ministry of Education pay all members of the Post Primary Teachers Association $500 to sign a new employment contract while non-union teachers will receive no such payment? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Acting Minister of Education) 
: 
 The Minister is delighted to see that the ministry and the Post Primary Teachers Association (PPTA) have made such positive progress in the current negotiation round. A settled industrial environment can only be good news for students. Bargaining is of course ongoing and he does not want to prejudice those negotiations. However he can say that the proposal for a $500 one-off payment recognises that many of the union’s claims are not being dealt with through bargaining. Instead they will be addressed through a longer-term process of engagement in working-parties which will require considerable time and effort on the part of union members and a settled industrial environment. 
Hon Bill English 
: Why does the Minister regard the union membership of a teacher as a more important quality to be rewarded than the competence of a teacher? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: He does not. 
Lynne Pillay 
: Is the Minister aware of any previous proposals to make one-off payments to teachers in order to settle collective agreement negotiations? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Yes. members will recall that in 2002 the industrial negotiations did not follow such a smooth course. At that time a proposal was put forward to make a one-off payment of $2000 to teachers. That proposal was put forward by the then National Party leader Bill English who also argued that many of the matters in the PPTA claim should be dealt with outside the bargaining process—which is exactly what is happening now. 
Jim Peters 
: Will the Ministry of Education also pay all members of the New Zealand Educational Institute and all members of other teacher-related unions $500 to sign new employment contracts thus clearing the way before the next election? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: It is not the Minister’s role to get involved in the bargaining process. That would be between the two parties. 
Deborah Coddington 
: Could the Minister explain how paying PPTA members a bonus and sending teacher unions on courses that “develop knowledge skills and attitudes to become more active in and for the union” assists with students’ education in any way? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: My understanding is that this is not a bonus. It is a proposal for a $500 one-off payment recognising that the union’s claims are not being dealt with through bargaining which is just what the past leader of the National Party Bill English has suggested. That is what is happening this time. 
Paul Adams 
: How does the Minister reconcile the additional payments to PPTA members with section 9(1) of the Employment Relations Act which states that an agreement: “… must not confer on a person because the person is or is not a member of a union or a particular union— … (b) any preference in relation to terms or conditions of employment …” and if he can reconcile it why is the Government so keen to remove this provision through the Employment Relations Law Reform Bill? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I think the member needs to be reminded that what we are dealing with here is a process of bargaining between the ministry and the PPTA which includes a $500 one-off payment because a range of issues are not being dealt with through that bargaining process. This will allow that longer-term process to go on so that other issues can be settled. That is what the payment is for. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister explain to the House why 3500 teachers who will be covered by this collective contract will not receive the $500 payment that he currently says he will pay only to union members? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The Minister does not pay them anything. This is the ministry and the PPTA negotiating exactly as that member suggested they should. 
Hon Bill English 
: Answer the question. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: He can answer the question himself; it is in his press release. He has made the suggestion on previous occasions. 
Hon Bill English 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I have now asked the Minister twice why one group of teachers gets the payment and another group does not. On two occasions he has given the same answer which did not answer the question. I am now put in the position where I will have to ask the question again which will mean that as an Opposition member I have had to use up three supplementary questions to get the answer to the primary question laid down as No. 3 which explicitly asks why the payment will be paid to some teachers but not to non-union teachers. So I think the Minister should be required to answer the question that has now been asked three times and I will have to ask it a fourth time if that is necessary. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I do not think the member should have to ask a third supplementary question. I will ask the Minister to comment on the second supplementary question and develop his answer. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: On behalf of the Minister of Education—[ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I will not have anybody interjecting like that at me. The member will stand withdraw and apologise. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: I withdraw and apologise. I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. Under the Standing Orders in this Parliament Ministers are not invited to comment on questions. They are required to answer them in the public interest. This is Parliament where Ministers are required to do that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I adjudged that the Minister had addressed the question. I was however helping the member who asked the question because I did not want him to have to use up another supplementary question. I now invite the Minister— 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I just point out that you have I think twice or three times criticised members of the Opposition for interfering on questions or raising points of order. Three times in three questions that have been asked members of the Government have called out before the member of the Opposition has asked the question and you have not said a thing. I note that you have looked hard at them— 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I looked hard to see who it was because if I had seen who it was he or she would have been out the door. 
Rodney Hide 
: Thank you for that but during Mr English’s point of order comments were heard coming from the Government benches. That makes four times that members of the Government have clearly broken your rule Mr Speaker that you would be brooking none of that behaviour yet it is the Opposition members who have been getting pulled up. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I made the mistake of being far too generous the first time when I should have ejected a member on my left. I apologise for that because I did the wrong thing. I tell members that if they interject in that way in the future they will go straight away. I have had enough. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I can do no better than to repeat that the bargaining process is ongoing and that the Minister does not want to prejudice those negotiations. However the outcome of those negotiations will potentially include a $500 one-off payment that recognises the union’s claims that it will be dealing with other issues outside that process. That is why some people will get the payment and others will not. 
Hon Bill English 
: Will the Minister inform school boards as to why some of their teachers will be paid $500 and some will not and has he been informed by the boards of schools that they already have teachers approaching them and telling them that the boards will have to come up with the $500 for the non-union members and that that is not what parents make donations for? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The bargaining is not yet finished. We do not know what the outcome will be. I have no doubt that it will be a point of discussion between boards and the ministry from then on in relation to how those wages will be paid. I ask the member to note that the bargaining has not yet finished and that the process must be allowed to continue. 
Hon Bill English 
: Can the Minister explain for the House’s benefit what the payment of $500 to union members has to do with teaching children effectively and why he thinks that paying $500 to PPTA members and not to any other teachers regardless of their qualifications or effectiveness will enhance the learning of New Zealand students? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I think the settlement between the ministry and the PPTA will lead to a settled school environment that will be good for students. That is the second part of the question answered: it will be good for students to have it settled. Regarding the earlier part of the question if such a payment is settled as part of the negotiations it is for ongoing engagement between the PPTA’s working-parties and the ministry to settle a range of ongoing issues. The member may not like the answer but those are the facts.