English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
English Bill: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:619;Page:14800] 
7.  
Hon BILL ENGLISH (National—Clutha-Southland) 
 to the  
Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education) 
: Can he confirm his statement with regard to community education funding at the Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology that “I am looking forward to seeing more money paid back.”; if so does this mean the polytechnic will be required to pay back money for up to 13298 enrolments where they have been unable to demonstrate student engagement or further learning? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY (Associate Minister of Education (Tertiary Education)) 
: 
 Yes I can confirm my statement. I am very concerned that the size of the Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology funding claim for the Cool IT programme might not have been appropriate and I would expect the polytechnic’s council to give serious consideration as to whether some repayment would be reasonable in the circumstances. 
Hon Bill English 
: Has the Minister seen advice from his officials that he cannot in fact require the Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology to repay any equivalent full-time student money; if so does he believe that his threat of “more discussions” will persuade the polytechnic to repay $10 million for the 13000 enrolments? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Under the current funding guide the legal advice is that a requirement would be extremely difficult. But that does not change the fact that we expect people to be accountable for public money and I do want to see the polytechnic consider that it is reasonable to pay money back if necessary. 
H V Ross Robertson 
: Given his previous answer can the Minister tell the House whether he is satisfied with the current funding guide for publicly funded tertiary education organisations? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Not entirely though it serves most of its general administrative functions well. The funding guide expresses the tertiary tuition funding policy which pre-dates the Tertiary Education Commission and the current tertiary reforms. Although there have been amendments unlike the previous National Government we have placed restrictions on inducements. Much of the guide is largely unchanged from the hands-off days of the 1990s but it is currently undergoing yet another review to try to close even more of these loopholes. [ 
Interruption 
] 
Mr SPEAKER 
: That is the last interjection this question time from the senior Government whip—the last! 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: Will the Associate Minister confirm that the Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology did not breach the tertiary funding guide by paying a commission to agents for each enrolment because such activity is not prohibited by the funding regulations; and does the Minister believe that such practices should be prohibited or not? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Yes I can confirm the first part of the question and for the second part of the question I can confirm that it should be prohibited. 
Deborah Coddington 
: Does the Minister think it is appropriate that Open Polytechnic of New Zealand hands out free prepay cellphones at taxpayers’ expense as inducements to enrolment in a life works course and will he be consistent and require that money to be paid back? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The Tertiary Education Commission is currently talking with the Open Polytechnic about the use of cellphones. I do not regard any inducement for a student to join any course as acceptable. 
Donna Awatere Huata 
: Can the Minister explain how the New Zealand Qualifications Authority and the Tertiary Education Commission allowed the Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology to enrol so many students in a programme where there were no checks on whether the students even owned a computer put the disc in a computer and began the course—let alone completed the course satisfactorily? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: When the first standard data return comes in from an institution like the Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology we are able to tell what the enrolment figures are. Immediately we do that we approach the institution about the level of enrolments. One of the reasons we are introducing profiles—which all institutions public and private are involved in right now—is so that in the future people literally sign up for what they will deliver before they do so. 
Hon Bill English 
: Given the Minister’s concern about ongoing student engagement at Christchurch Polytechnic Institute of Technology can he tell the House how he knows whether the 46000 people who enrolled in Tairawhiti Polytechnic’s radio singalong course actually turned on the radio? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: I sincerely hope they did because they would have been listening to a good local iwi station. Under the Act the Tertiary Education Commission looks at those courses. It has looked at that course and that is how it reports to me. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: When did the Minister first learn of the practice of commissions or inducements for enrolments and why did he not do something about it back then years ago? [ 
Interruption 
] No there was the Open Polytechnic and the Rotorua one. 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: The funding guide has been modified and changed under this Government over the last couple of years as we have begun to learn about people doing such things as inducing. That is exactly what we have been doing unlike the National Party which for 9 years allowed inducements and did nothing. 
Rodney Hide 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. If question time is going to work Ministers have to address the question. Mr Peters was quite plain. He asked when the Minister first learnt of those inducements and what action he took. The Minister never came close to addressing those questions. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I thought he started out by saying “in the last 2 years”. I thought those were his first words. I listened to the answer very carefully. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. I asked for the exact time—and I had hoped it would be to the month—that the Minister first heard about it. Saying “in the last 2 years” is not good enough. When in the last 2 years did he first learn about it? 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I am not judging the quality of the answer. The Minister answered the question. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: When precisely did the Minister learn about the practice of commissions and inducements such as occurred in Rotorua and with the Open Polytechnic of New Zealand? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Although I have a phenomenal memory I would have to ask the member to write that question down so that I can give him a precise date and time. 
Hon Bill English 
: Given the Minister’s concern about the type of course offered at Christchurch Polytechnic for which he paid $15 million will he give the House an undertaking that he will investigate other courses in respect of which exactly the same issues have been raised and for which he paid another $65 million at other polytechnics; if he will not investigate the others why not? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Yes. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: Given the Minister’s comment that the practice which he was aware of had gone on for 9 years under the National Government—which means that for 5 years he has known about it—why did he not do something about it when he got the responsibility? 
Hon STEVE MAHAREY 
: Inducements of the kind that we are talking about here began to appear under this Government only relatively recently. That is why we have begun to change the funding guide. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: I have one member on her feet who alone will be heard. 
Deborah Coddington 
: I seek leave to table an answer from the Minister to my parliamentary question which states that he wrote to Te Wananga o Aotearoa on 11 April 2002 regarding the issuing of 16000 free prepaid cellphones to students. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that. Is there any objection? There is. 
Hon Bill English 
: I seek leave to table a document from Asure a State-owned enterprise which shows that it was one of the agents enrolling students at Christchurch Polytechnic and that it was paid commission for that. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: Leave is sought to table that. Is there any objection? There is not. 
Document not tabled. 
Rt Hon Winston Peters 
: I raise a point of order Mr Speaker. You will recall that in one of the Minister’s answers he said that this practice went on for 9 years under the National Government. Then in his last answer to me he said that the practice occurred and he became aware of it only when Labour became the Government. Those two answers cannot stand together. That is what he said. His last answer was totally contradictory to his prior answer. I think we are entitled to know which one is true. 
Mr SPEAKER 
: It is not my job to reconcile answers. That is a subject for debate. We have a general debate following this debate.