Hide Rodney: Education (Disestablishment of Early Childhood Development Board) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
Hide Rodney: Education (Disestablishment of Early Childhood Development Board) Amendment Bill — Second Reading Instruction to Committee In Committee Third Reading 
[Volume:616;Page:12139] 
RODNEY HIDE (ACT) 
: 
 I am pleased that Dr Wayne Mapp pointed out the constitutional issues over which the Minister has got himself into difficulties. However I want to talk about the purpose clause and paragraph (b) in particular. Clause 3 states: “Purpose—the purpose of the Act is—(b) to provide for other matters related to the reorganisation such as a new funding mechanism for certain early childhood centres to enable grants to be paid by the Ministry rather than through the Early Childhood Development Board.” This is what worries the ACT party because we have discovered that Trevor Mallard has spent some $5 million on bounties. We heard the Hon Taito Phillip Field say that Pacific Island and Maoriparticipation had increased. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. Fairly early on in the member’s speech I would like you to rule on whether the subject of grants that have been made legally by the Ministry of Education and are not affected by this bill—and certainly not grants to licence-exempt centres which are outlined in Part 2—are appropriate matters to be raised. This is a very narrow debate in the Committee stage and I ask you to rule on whether it is appropriate for the member to continue to highlight issues that have nothing to do with this bill. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Speaking to the point of order I point out that we are discussing Part 1 and I think the Minister will agree with that. We are discussing clause 3(b) and ministry funding and early childhood education. The Hon Taito Phillip Field has already discussed this matter. This is one of our concerns. ACT is trying to explain what is wrong with this bill. If you rule out debate on the funding and the way the early childhood system is being run then what would we talk about? 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: Rodney Hide’s comments reflect the point I was making. Phillip Field spoke in the second reading where his points might just have been appropriate but certainly those matters are not appropriate in the Committee stage. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: I certainly understood the member was talking to clause 3(b) but there has been quite a bit of straying during this coverage on Part 1. It does contain the purpose clause and such provisions allow members some latitude in the discussion of the issues across the bill. I would remind members to keep to the bill. The member was talking to clause 3(b). 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Thank you. That was a very wise ruling and I support the Chairperson in that. We do have concerns about this bill and we have concerns about this Minister and the way he has gone about the business of early childhood education particularly as it relates to the purposes set out in this bill. This is a Minister who has blown $5 million. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: No no. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: I know he does not want that discussed in Parliament. I know he does not answer Official Information Act requests. I know he likes sitting beside the Chairperson and trying to shout down Opposition members who are raising issues. I am highlighting a problem with the Ministry of Education and with centralisation. That is the purpose of this bill is it not? 
The ministry had these contracts that involved phantom children. It also involved children who were pre-enrolled. Taxpayers’ money was used to the extent of $600 to $1000 a person. The ministry was paying these contractors who were ringing up pre-schools and asking for the names of the kids who were enrolled. Then the contractors were using those names to get money out of the ministry under this Minister’s contracts. He knows that. That was $1 million worth of fraud and that Minister is guilty of a cover-up. 
Hon Trevor Mallard 
: I raise a point of order Madam Chairperson. I am going to have another attempt. Some activities that happened in the 2002-03 year have been misrepresented by the member. They have nothing to do with this legislation. They have nothing to do with the issues of the transfer of the Early Childhood Development Board across to the Ministry of Education. I submit again that this is a narrow technical bill and it is not appropriate for the member to raise matters that happened under an entirely different function of the Ministry of Education over 18 months ago. 
Dr the Hon Lockwood Smith 
: The disestablishment of a very significant part of this country’s education sector is not a narrow technical matter. The purpose that is intended invites wide debate because there can be serious questions as to the wording of the purpose of this bill. The disestablishment of a very significant sector of our education system is a very big matter. 
Stephen Franks 
: The effective date is in Part 1. We are told that the changes will create an effective date that is after this change was made. It is relevant in that an institution that was functioning properly as far as we know is being transferred to a ministry that appears not to be under proper control. 
Although the Minister may not like to have the performance of the ministry appraised in connection with this bill what else should parliamentarians do when they have a bill that takes an existing organisation and merges it into another one? It is a natural debating point. These are natural questions that would occur to anyone—such as which one is working which one is defective which one is under proper control which one has a Minister who knows what it is doing? The organisation was independent before. There is no hint that it was operating with fraud or colluding in contracts that were fraudulent. We have a ministry that is tarred with that reputation and it is perfectly proper for us to debate it on those terms. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member on his feet can raise reasonable relevant matters. However he needs to stick to the purpose of the bill. The performance of the ministry in previous years is not absolutely relevant but the member can certainly discuss the ministry’s future role in carrying out its functions under this bill. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: Again can I say that is a very wise ruling in support of Parliament. I thank the Chair for that. 
The CHAIRPERSON (Ann Hartley) 
: The member knows he must not comment on rulings that are given. 
RODNEY HIDE 
: What we have in clause 3(a) is that the Early Childhood Development Board is to be disestablished and that all the functions assets liabilities and rights are sent across to the Ministry of Education. That is where our concern lies. The Ministry of Education has shown itself in this area to be incompetent incapable and the object of fraudsters. That is what has happened. The Minister knows it and has done nothing. That is why we like the independent board. That is why we are opposing this legislation. Four companies and the same people applying for the money got away with $1 million and the silly old Ministry of Education and the Minister did not know. 
If the Minister wants Opposition parties to support this bill why does he not honour his obligations and deliver on my Official Information Act requests instead of denying them instead of playing games instead of fighting the Ombudsman every step of the way? Indeed why has he had his own officials go into the file to reorganise it to try to sanitise what has gone on? What has happened here is fraud of the highest order. We oppose this bill.