Peachey Allan: Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
Peachey Allan: Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill — Second Reading 
[Volume:659;Page:8478] 
ALLAN PEACHEY (National—Tamaki) 
: 
 I think the member does jest. I want to make some largely general comments on the Education (Polytechnics) Amendment Bill. In one very very good way it is a step back to the past. There is a provision in the bill—a bill that is widely supported around the House—that will allow the Manukau Institute of Technology to establish a technical high school. 
There was a time in New Zealand when technical high schools had a proud and successful role to play. I think of my father’s own school Wanganui Technical College; I think also of Seddon Technical College in Auckland Hutt Valley Memorial Technical College King Edward Technical College in Dunedin and so on. These were fine schools that gave generations of New Zealanders a very solid grounding in a technical education. Is it not a tragedy to look back over 30 or 40 years and think about the bright sparks who decided that these schools should be closed down and that a different form of education should be available to those with a bent in technology in the technical areas in the trades? 
So we have come full circle and I think one of the great things that this Government is doing is re-establishing the role and importance of technical education. We know that the future of this country will depend as much on the technicians and the technologists whom we have available as it will on other groups in the community. 
I want to try to put the governance provisions for the polytech sector into a wider context and in a more logical context than for example the previous speaker with his speculation chose to do. It is important to acknowledge that the polytech sector plays an important role as part of one of the components that make up an effective tertiary sector. We should never ever underestimate the importance or the potential importance that the polytech sector has as part of a well-based broad tertiary education sector. Any lack of prestige any lack of quality and any lack of performance in the polytech sector undermine the ability of this country to meet the demands for skilled labour. That is one area in which in recent years this country has not been performing as well as it needs to. We can argue about having 20 or 14 or eight members on polytech councils but to me that is a largely irrelevant argument. The argument has to be around what governance structures will be the most favourable in terms of encouraging strategic thinking vision innovation and flexibility and will allow the polytechs to progress. 
The significant aspect of this bill which certainly the Opposition I think has either lost sight of or chosen not to acknowledge is a very very important shift away from governance arrangements that are pretty much solely based on representation to governance arrangements that are based on expertise on vision and on an ability to provide a rigorous governance structure for the polytechs to develop. I endorse entirely the comments of Sir Roger Douglas about the absolute importance of the quality of the chairperson and the deputy chairperson but I want to add another dimension and that is the quality of the chief executive. Get those appointments right and the polytechs will function to the standard and the level that the economy of this country and its future require. 
In terms of chief executives I am neutral as to whether the chief executives sit on the council. What I am not neutral about is the qualities that a chief executive needs to lead a polytech: understanding the nature of learning understanding the nature of a technical education—an education in technology—understanding what happens and what needs to happen in the lecture theatres the seminar rooms the laboratories and the workshop. That is a far greater test of whether a polytech will be successful than who sits on the governing council. Thank you.