Lees-Galloway Iain: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
Lees-Galloway Iain: Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill — In Committee 
[Volume:670;Page:16854] 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY (Labour—Palmerston North) 
: 
 I also speak in support of the amendment to clause 2 of the Education (Freedom of Association) Amendment Bill. The original commencement clause states: “This Act comes into force 1 year after the date on which it receives the Royal assent.” The Education and Science Committee saw fit to change that date to 1 January 2012. My understanding is that the intent of that change was to increase the length of time between this Act’s receiving the Royal assent and its coming into force. Of course we find ourselves in a difficult situation now. As Mr Robertson pointed out this bill has taken some time to make its way through Parliament. 
Sitting suspended from 6 p.m. to 7.30 p.m. 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: As I was saying before the dinner break the amendment put up by Grant Robertson is to amend clause 2 by omitting “1 January 2012” and substituting “1 January 2013”—that is to delay the commencement of the bill by 1 year. Clearly the clause needs to be amended. I think that goes without saying because the select committee recognised that the original wording of the bill which was for the bill to commence 1 year after the date on which it receives the Royal assent posed some difficulties for students associations universities polytechnics and private training establishments. It could mean that the change would potentially come in midway through a semester with all the difficulties that that would bring with it. The select committee also recognised that students associations and their tertiary institutes would need a significant period of time in which to make the adjustments in order to start working on the service agreements that many of the students associations are working on with their universities and polytechnics for the new regime of voluntary student membership. 
The select committee recognised that issue and wanted to make the period of time longer. Well because of the time it has taken for the bill to progress through the House the period of time is shorter. It is less than 1 year until 1 January 2012 which restricts the amount of time in which the changes can be made so the intention of the amendment made by the select committee has now been lost and in fact the opposite is now the case. 
There is absolutely no doubt that the commencement clause needs to be amended and the only amendment we have before us on the Table is the one to change the commencement date to 1 January 2013. It seems to me to be a sensible amendment bearing in mind that Labour is opposed to the bill and we will be voting against it throughout the process. If the bill goes ahead in order to make it workable the amendment has to be made. 
The benefit of the commencement date being 1 January is that it is a clear date. Most universities these days still have summer schools so the universities and students associations will still be operating but it is a time when things are fairly quiet. It will not be during normal semester time. Therefore it gives the universities and students associations the opportunity to make the changeover on 1 January. It will not come up on some arbitrary date. It will not come up midway through the year. But it does deliver on the intention of the select committee to give students associations and tertiary institutes additional time because a lot of work is required from both organisations to make the adjustments to the proposed new regime—not least to the service agreements around services such as health centres orientation events coordination and probably advocacy services. A lot of negotiation will be required to ensure that advocacy services even though they are probably being funded by the university remain at arm’s length from the university and exactly how all that gets organised will take quite a lot of negotiation. 
There will also be the matter of costs and the fact that the universities polytechnics and private training establishments will be increasing their service levies. No doubt it will take some time for the university and polytechnic councils to make the decisions around what those service levies will be. There is also a range of other issues that need to be accounted for. I suspect there is some risk that the Government needs to take into account which is the fact that the amount that will be borrowed against student loans will have to increase because the service fees will be increased. There is also the potential for other fees to increase as well. That will mean students will need to borrow more against those student loans. The Government will have to ensure that it is in a good fiscal position to be able to lend that money. We know that the Government is looking pretty hard at student loans at the moment. There is some consideration of reintroducing interest charges on student loans and obviously the Government sees those loans as something of a risk. 
The increased fees that will result from the changes that have to be made in the period between when the bill receives the Royal assent and when it commences are quite substantial. Not only will the universities polytechnics private training establishments and students associations have to figure out what it all means for them but also the Government—and I imagine quite a few ministries and departments as well—will have to figure out what it means for it. Quite a lot of work needs to be done and frankly trying to squeeze it all in before 1 January 2012 is just not feasible; it simply is no longer feasible. 
The Minister Heather Roy says she does not want to see students associations collapse and that that is not the intention of the bill. As I have said Labour questions that statement but if that is the Minister’s intention then increasing the length of time between the bill receiving the Royal assent and its commencement makes a lot of sense. It gives everybody a little more time to make the adjustment. I see Louise Upston having a bit of a smile and a laugh about that— 
Louise Upston 
: She is actually a member not a Minister. It is important that you address the right person in the chair. I just thought I’d correct you on that one. 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: OK. I see Louise Upston is having a bit of a smile about that— 
Louise Upston 
: No just factually correcting you given that you were not on the select committee and do not actually understand what occurred. But that’s OK. Carry on. 
IAIN LEES-GALLOWAY 
: The more the member wants to say on the bill the better. We will just debate it further. Quite a lot of work needs to be done and it needs to be dealt with. It is actually quite serious. I think we are all trying to make the bill which is a bad bill functional. We are trying to make it work so that it does not absolutely obliterate students associations. Although personally I do not think it will make any difference for the students associations at polytechnics it may be just enough to help the university polytechnics tread water. The current situation whereby they would have only until 1 January 2012 does not allow for that at all. It means a lot of things will be rushed probably some of those service agreements will not be exactly what they should be and the universities will not have time to figure out their fee structure either. 
The amendment is pretty simple. I do not think it is overly controversial. It comes back to the original intention of the select committee’s change to allow students associations more time. I submit that the amendment should be a pretty easy one for the Government to support.