Coddington Deborah: Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Coddington Deborah: Education (Export Education Levy) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:619;Page:14748] 
DEBORAH CODDINGTON (ACT) 
: 
 On behalf of the ACT party I rise to oppose this legislation and in particular Part 1. New section 238I(1A) inserted by clause 4(2) states that: “Subsection (1B) applies if—(a) an international student is or was enrolled with a private training establishment”. That is the whole ideological thrust behind this legislation and is one of the reasons why we oppose it. This is yet another example of how private enterprise is being punished by this Government. The legislation does not apply to public tertiary training establishments. It does not apply to any public education establishments but only to private training establishments. Yes some private tertiary establishments have let their students down really badly and in a reprehensible way. But why do we have to punish all of them because of the actions of a few? Why is the Minister not applying the same sanctions against public tertiary institutions that have taken money to which they were not entitled? They will be let off with a slap on the back of the wrist with a wet bus ticket. Where is it stated that this Government will tax all the other public tertiary institutions to make up for what Christchurch Polytechnic has done in the last few weeks? In exposing that matter I give credit to the National spokesperson on education the Hon Bill English because if he had not brought it to the Government’s attention absolutely nothing would have been done about it. 
The Minister is hell-bent on getting the private sector out of education in this country. We have seen that with regard to tertiary education and early childhood education. Not only are private providers being prejudiced but parents who want to send their children to private providers are being disadvantaged. The other thing with regard to this bill is that it is not just the providers that are private tertiary establishments that will be damaged by this legislation. Consumers will be damaged as well. This legislation reduces the choice for students because the inevitable result of imposing the levy on all private providers is that they will have to put up their fees. That is one result the Minister will be quite happy about because he will be able to herd more people into public institutions where outcomes do not matter. It is a matter of statistics; it is just a matter of bums on seats. This afternoon in question time in the House the Government crowed about the drop in the unemployment figures. We do not hear it crow about the number of students who enrol in dodgy polytech courses. They are enticed into those courses and that hides and distorts the statistics of the number of people who are unemployed. It is just a matter of statistics; it is not about outcomes and measuring achievement at all. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I am aware that we are on Part 1 and that it is the broadest part of the bill. However a general discussion on alleged dodgy polytechnics and the unemployment rate is beyond Part 1. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I ask the member to stick to Part 1. 
DEBORAH CODDINGTON 
: Part 1 does deal with private training establishments that cannot have not or will not provide in whole or in part the course of study or training. My point is that we oppose this legislation because it applies only to private establishments and does not apply to public establishments. That is a gross omission from the legislation. 
As I said this legislation is ideologically driven. Why are we imposing this tax—because that is what it is? It is a tax because it can be used for all sorts of reasons such as making refunds once twice or three times. It opens the way for double-dipping. That has not been cut off. Why are we imposing this legislation on private establishments which have no say over who enters the industry? The gatekeeper will be the New Zealand Qualifications Authority. It is the very gatekeeper that failed to do proper checks on private establishments that could not did not or would not provide courses to students leading to the introduction of this legislation. The Minister should take a call instead of taking a point of order to explain why the New Zealand Qualifications Authority can be trusted.