King Colin: Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
King Colin: Education (Tertiary Reforms) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:643;Page:13176] 
COLIN KING (National—Kaikoura) 
: 
 It was good to hear the Associate Minister for Tertiary Education explain some of the details that the Education and Science Committee spent months and months working our way through. It is good to know that the Minister has some understanding of the challenges that the committee had to face. 
But for just a moment or two I would like to talk about Dr Paul Hutchison’s Supplementary Order Paper 161. I point out to the Minister that the reinforcement of academic freedom was put in clause 3 only at the very last moment. It is a bit like the requirement that information be supplied to the Tertiary Education Commission before funding is granted. Listening earlier to the chairman of the select committee gave me some confidence that he too is aware that under closer examination there are some problems with that ability of the Tertiary Education Commission to demand information before funding is given. I see the risk emanating from the point of view of how it appears to a person on the outside—a partner or a joint-venture client who may be entering into a research programme. Such people will look at the requirement and decide on balance to go with a university that can guarantee them categorically that there is no spectre of confidential information being disclosed. It is on that basis that the National Party is particularly concerned about that requirement. 
As I mentioned in the second reading debate our eminent member Dr Paul Hutchison is ever ever aware of—and is probably the most well-informed person in this Committee about—the alignment that is necessary between universities and the science fraternity. It is something that we really have not done very well. That probably highlights the attitude of the Tertiary Education Commission and the angle at which it is approaching this whole thing. It is approaching effectively to put it in simple terms an issue around delivering skills and trade training at institutes of technology and polytechnics—low-level diplomas certificates and some degree-level qualifications—that is about managing quality yet we have actually roped in the universities and have done it under the view that they will do as we say. They will not be able to be heard around any sensitivities. With this particular provision in Part 1 I believe we are putting at risk a lot of the commercial science arms of universities. I want to make that particular point. 
I now want to move on to a point about quality. Clause 14 includes section 159KBA “Monitoring and reporting function of chief executive in relation to institutions”. I draw the Committee’s attention to a review that was done recently and resulted in  
Review of the Operation of the Tertiary Education Institutions at Risk Legislation 
. It deals with sections 195A to 195F of the Education Act. I think it is necessary for the Committee to be aware that from my working through this bill it will go nowhere near tidying up this problem. The report talks about the Tertiary Advisory Monitoring Unit and its responsibility but in terms of the auditing process that happens every 5 years it states: “… TEIs should also be measured in terms of the quality of education provision. … In the longer term it may be appropriate to review the current criteria …”. Then we go to section 46 of the report which states: “It is likely for example that as part of the Investing in a Plan process the TEC will have more tools to support TEIs to respond to the difficulties they are facing by providing the right kinds of incentives to encourage good performance.” 
That is quite an indicting statement. It is an indictment that after 8 years of Labour Government we have a comment from the auditing body of standards of education inside the tertiary education sector about providing “the right kinds of incentives to encourage good performance.” The right kinds of incentives are not in the bill. I think that is a point that is well worth being made.