Mallard Trevor; Martin TraceyClauses 98 to 116 and 144The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): I think they have been covered and therefore there being no members going for calls we will now move on to the next theme which is the establishment of and types of schools—comprising clauses 98 to 116 and 144.I will just say to members that one of the disadvantages of having a former Minister in the Chair is that he does recognise a lot of it and this theme is not that complicated there is not that much change and it is a bit of codification. So it is probably a bit of—Hon Hekia Parata: Narrow.The CHAIRPERSON (Hon Trevor Mallard): Well it should not take quite as long.TRACEY MARTIN (NZ First): I am speaking to clauses 98 to 116 and clause 144 which refer to the integration legislation and specifically I want to talk about the absorption of the integration legislation. I want to speak to my Supplementary Order Paper 294. What that tries to do under clause 144 is to put back into new section 442(2): Subject to subsection (1) no prospective student may be refused enrolment at a State integrated school on the grounds of—(a) religion race or socio-economic background; or (b) lack of willingness of the parent to make financial contributions to the school."We did ask at the Education and Science Committee why this was being removed. It was fuzzy I am sorry. It was fuzzy from the officials as to why we needed—if everything else was being absorbed why this was being removed. If I can just go into the reasons how the removal of this clause can actually affect what is going on inside State integrated schools once they are absorbed inside the Education Act 1989 is shown for example in the case recently when my offices were contacted by a student who was forbidden to go to chapel because their parent had not paid a particular bill. The integrated schools are going to become—they are State schools. They are State integrated schools.No other State school can actually demand that things be paid for the delivery of the curriculum. If going to chapel is part of your timetable if going to chapel is part of the everyday life of the school then why would a school be able to stop that student from participating in that particular school-wide activity due to the inability or unwillingness of a parent to pay a fee? So the question actually to the Minister in the chair Nicky Wagner is: why has that been removed and will she support Supplementary Order Paper 294 to reinstate it?There was another—well actually I will probably leave it at that. If the Minister is able to answer that question—why has there been the removal of new section 442(2) and if State integrated schools are going to be treated the same as every other State school when it comes to the capacity to provide free high-quality education then why will they be allowed to refuse enrolment based on religion race or socio-economic background? We recognise that there are protections for their special character in every other clause inside this absorption. Every student who goes there knows that if they go to a Catholic school or a Hindi school or a Te Reo Māori Christian Catholic school that is the special character of the school. But the schools should not be able to refuse enrolment based on religion race or socio-economic background. So if the Minister could answer please why that clause was removed in the first place."