Rich Katherine: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
Rich Katherine: Questions for Oral Answer — Questions to Ministers 
[Volume:637;Page:7826] 
4.  
KATHERINE RICH (National) 
 to the  
Minister of Education 
: Does he stand by his statement to parents broadcast on 24 January 2007: “if you’re a parent and you’re watching this very simple your child’s 3 to 4 you go down to the local centre enrol say my child’s here for these 20 hours that’s all you do”; if so why? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Minister for Economic Development) 
 on behalf of the 
 Minister of Education 
: That sort of mangled English is more like something my predecessor would have said than my normally erudite approach but yes. 
Katherine Rich 
: So come 1 July what happens next if a parent who watched the Minister goes down to the local centre and says: “My child’s 3 to 4. I’m here for my 20 free hours. That’s all I do.” and staff at the centre say: “Sorry it’s not on offer.”; what is the Minister’s advice to the tens of thousands of parents who will be disappointed? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: The early childhood education centres that are fully staffed with registered staff and that choose not to take the $92 a week deduction for the 20 hours will I think be very few. Parents will put pressure on those centres to take it. 
Hon Ruth Dyson 
: Has the Minister received any reports about anyone being confused about the rules of 20 hours’ free early childhood education? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I apologise in advance for the length of the answer to that supplementary question. Yes that person quoted half a sentence from the Ministry of Education handbook on 20 hours’ free early childhood education claiming that the rules allow centres to refuse to enrol children whose parents do not wish to pay optional charges. Section 4.3 of the handbook clearly explains the use of optional charges. An optional charge is a request for a contribution that parents may choose whether or not to make. There will be no penalty for parents who choose to not make the contribution. It also explains that the optional charge may be enforced only once a parent has agreed to pay it. The Opposition spokesperson on education seemed to be confused about that in the House on Tuesday. If she had read the whole sentence from the handbook rather than half the sentence she would not have been confused. I will give her a bit of generosity and say she did it accidentally and cannot read well because otherwise she would have been misleading Parliament. 
Hon Brian Donnelly 
: Does the Minister agree that the real beneficiaries of this policy will be those 3 and 4-year-olds who at present receive no early childhood education experience at all—including 17.2 percent of those who go on to decile 1 schools; can he also confirm that $14.45 million has been set aside to provide learning accommodation for those children under the 20 free hours’ early childhood education policy? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I will take the member’s word on the second part of the question; I could get the additional information but because I am acting on the Minister’s behalf in the House I cannot confirm that. I agree that it will be very good to have that increased number of children receiving early childhood education but a $92 per week discount on average for parents for the early childhood education of their kids is not bad for families either. 
Katherine Rich 
: Is the House to understand that the policy is now not about offering 20 free hours’ early childhood education but about offering a discount as the Minister has just described it? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No the only person who thinks that is the member opposite. What I said was on average parents will be saving $92 per week through getting free early childhood education. For members of a party that opposes that and wants to add $92 per week on to the bills of parents of 3 and 4-year-olds as members opposite do they are trying to defend free early childhood education a bit hard. 
Katherine Rich 
: Does the Minister understand what he has just done in shifting the description of the policy from one of being 20 free hours’ early childhood education to one of being a discount when the Minister has studiously avoided the word “subsidy” previously; if so does he now admit it is a discount? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: One can have a 100 percent discount—it will be free. What part of that does the member not understand? It will be free for 3 and 4-year-olds in the centres that are offering it. My bet is that over a period of time just about every centre will offer it because why would a parent use a centre that is on average $92 per week more expensive than the one next door to it? 
Katherine Rich 
: What would the Minister’s reaction be if the Auckland Kindergarten Association—an association that oversees 107 kindergartens in Auckland—announces that it will not be implementing the 20 free hours’ early childhood education policy because by accepting it it will be worse off? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I have not consulted with the Minister on that but I can say from my experience that it would be one of disbelief. Generally the people involved in running the Auckland Kindergarten Association have been bright people and they are people who know that getting this additional amount of money—and a lot more going forward—is in the interests of the parents represented by that association. I am sure that the good people who run the Auckland Kindergarten Association are not prepared to sacrifice a very large amount of funding next year and even more the year after that. 
Katherine Rich 
: Can we take it from the Minister’s last statement that he is going to threaten centres if they do not take up this offer and can he explain to the House why the Auckland Kindergarten Association should implement the policy of 20 free hours if it will get less money overall per child per hour than it gets now? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No.