Mallard Trevor: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
Mallard Trevor: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee Speaker Recalled In Committee 
[Volume:674;Page:20323] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 Mr Chairman the first point I will make is one directly to you to thank you for allowing a broader debate especially from Louise Upston and the member—I was going to say the Minister—in charge of the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill Heather Roy. I think if there was any justice in the ACT Party she would still be a Minister and a very good Minister in the education area as well. I think she was certainly the best and most effective Minister in the education group there has been in the time of this Key-led Government. I thank the Hon Heather Roy for the work that she did there. I assume she is still “the Hon” Heather Roy. I am never quite sure. 
Hon Heather Roy 
: Yes I am. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: It has been renewed? I am pleased the Queen has seen fit to continue the member’s honour—honorific at least. 
I think it is important to make some general points in response to the points the member has made and to make it very clear that members on this side of the Chamber want to have the voices of students heard and for them to be read into the record. If we are not allowed to table submissions then I am sure other members will be able to read into the record some of the submissions. 
There was a variety. There was a variety of opinions from students. Opinions were very heavily weighted in one direction but there were different views. I am never sure whether I agree with my old liberal friend Pete Hodgson who wants to be fair to young ACT supporters ACT on Campus and groups like that. I do not have that inclination in the same way but he is an old liberal and believes that views on both sides should be expressed and heard. That is why in response to the invitation from Louise Upston he chose to seek leave to table a variety of submissions. 
I am somewhat saddened that one of the submissions could not be tabled. Despite the fact that I disagreed with it substantially it was a well-written and well-argued submission. Heather Roy was one of the members who blocked it being tabled so that members who were not on the Education and Science Committee and are not familiar with it do not have the additional opportunity to look at it. I think she needs to take some responsibility for that. Of course I would have been much happier if the other submissions from the students associations which my colleague Rick Barker sought to table and some of the individual submissions which my colleague Pete Hodgson sought to table could be tabled. 
Sandra Goudie 
: Transitional provisions. Is that right? 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I notice that the fishwife from Coromandel is interjecting yet again. 
Sandra Goudie 
: You’re meant to be on the transitional provision clause. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: There she goes again—again and again and again—like an orange roughy on a hook. 
Chris Tremain 
: I raise a point of order Mr Chairperson. This is way off the mark in terms of clause 9. At the start of this speech the member did start to have a wider ambit but now he is so far wide of the mark that it is ridiculous. I ask you to call him back to order. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I am happy to do that. 
The CHAIRPERSON (H V Ross Robertson) 
: Thank you. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: I have some important points to make and questions to ask the member in the chair about clause 9 which I would like to do over the next three calls; I am on my first call on this particular clause. 
The first question is about the actual effect of this transitional provision. What does the term “until the expiry of his or her current term of enrolment;” mean? For example someone might be enrolled for a PhD and take 5 years to complete it. I am told that is not an unusual length of time. I think people at a lot of institutions can take up to 7 years without getting into trouble. Does that mean that in 5 or 7 years’ time there will still be people enrolled for their PhDs who came in under the students associations schemes before this legislation applied on 1 January 2012? I think postgraduate students are the ones most likely to have periods of enrolment that span a number of years. Most degrees are 3 or 4 years; it goes on. What if someone enrols for a BA honours degree and it is a 4-year degree? Is the expiry of the current term of enrolment 4 years? I was not at the select committee right at the point when they did the deliberations and made these particular changes but there are a number of points that I want to make as a result of those changes.