Mallard Trevor: Education Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
Mallard Trevor: Education Amendment Bill — Third Reading 
[Volume:662;Page:10858] 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD (Labour—Hutt South) 
: 
 There are a few points I want to make. It is a pity that the Minister of Education did not acknowledge in her speech the ceremony she went to this morning. Today within the precincts of the House we have seen New Zealand’s top scholars of 2009. They are a truly wonderful group of young people who are evidence of an education system that is working well for the very best kids. I say that I am especially proud of Wellington’s disproportionate number of top scholars. They have done well. I am particularly proud of the way the State schools have gone. Some State schools though slightly less prestigious than others have had some very good results and even Invercargill was represented amongst the top scholars—it was a pity that Dunedin was represented but Invercargill did proportionately very well! I acknowledge the Governor-General and the fact that he made a very generous speech on that occasion. The only other thing I would say is that the Minister’s speech on that occasion matched her speech on this one. 
There are number of points I will make about the Education Amendment Bill. The first point is that I sit somewhere between the bill that Labour introduced when it was in Government and the bill that the Minister introduced. I think Mr Peachey chaired the Education and Science Committee well to a midpoint. We took on board some of the criticisms and we managed to distinctly improve the legislation as it went through the committee. There was an unusual combination of ACT Labour and Green members on the committee ensuring that the accountability mechanisms as part of the commissioner and statutory manager arrangements were brought properly into law. I acknowledge the role of Sir Roger Douglas and the work that he did on that issue in the committee. I think we now have legislation that makes a positive improvement to the Education Act. 
One of the things that I thought we might have heard about from the Minister was how progress is going on the rewrite of the Act. I would have thought that it would be ready for introduction now. It is a major piece of work. It is fair to say that the education legislation is a dog’s breakfast. During my time as the Minister of Education in the first part of the last decade a lot of work was done towards rewriting the Act and I would have thought that it be just about ready now. When that legislation hits the House it will be a major job for the select committee to make sure that the various pieces of legislation knit together properly in the new Education Act. I hope the title of that Education Act will have a date at the end of it that starts with the digits“20” rather than it being any later than that. 
The bill validates some payments in respect of the change of proprietors of integrated schools. I think that is a very good example of how a validation that does not cost the Crown any money works. As the Minister of Education has pointed out there was another proposal. That proposal was to relieve King’s High School in Dunedin of some obligations that it currently has to Westpac bank. Again it would be at no disadvantage to Westpac bank and at no disadvantage to the Crown to use money that is otherwise available to King’s High School in order to pay off some debt. I think it is fair to say that a previous principal and a previous board had entered into an arrangement by way of a misunderstanding of the way forward. The Minister has indicated that she will not support that. I have indicated that that is something that the Labour Party and I am assured the Greens will pursue going forward. 
There are a number of finance bills—and I know that Mr Tremain knows there are a number of finance bills—that generally go through the House without debate and without amendment during the Committee stage. There will be numerous opportunities to introduce validating clauses that will be within the scope of those bills. All I invite the Minister to do is to look at the three or four schools that are involved and make the policy change. Then I am sure debate in the House will go more smoothly. I am not inviting her to spend any money at all; I am asking her to look at the schools. 
I went to the Minister’s office and she told me she would fix that up—I went to the Minister’s office and she told me she would fix it up. If she does fix it up the problem will go away but until she fixes it up the House will debate amendments on what otherwise could have been uncontroversial validating legislation. This is one of the things that members of Parliament in the Opposition can do and it is one of the things that Ministers can do: when there is something wrong it is the putting right that counts. 
I know that two of my colleagues made a mistake. The original mistake happened in my time. It was not advice from the Ministry of Education and it was not advice from me but the principal and the board got it wrong. We accept that. A couple of my colleagues considered the issue and I do not think they considered it well. I have accepted that. That is something that I will take on— 
Hon Darren Hughes 
: Most loyal of characters. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: No my arguments were clearly not persuasive enough. 
But I know that eventually we will get there. It is like water on a stone: eventually we will get there and the right thing will be done for King’s High School. I do not know about the other three schools. I will visit them I will talk to them and I will find out their circumstances. The Minister has been kind enough to give me a list of those schools. We will work to see whether they do fit in to the same category or whether there is a try-on. If it is a try-on we will not support them but if they do— 
Hon Anne Tolley 
: If you want to be the Minister get elected. 
Hon TREVOR MALLARD 
: That is the classic comment of that Minister who says it all over the place. She said it three times at public meetings around the country. When she runs out of logic and when she does not have an argument she says: I’m not doing it for any reason at all; I’m doing it because I’m the Minister.” She said that on three separate occasions and she just said it again—“If you want a change then become the Minister.” She is saying that she is allowed to do stupid things because she is the Minister. I tell her that she is not allowed. She will be held to account. 
She will have to discuss with the Prime Minister the Minister of Finance the whips and the Leader of the House why she will not let King’s High School spend money which is allocated to it in the Crown accounts and will cost the Crown nothing on paying off an old debt rather than having $5000 a month in interest going to Westpac bank. It should be there for teaching staff. It should be there for computers. It should be there for the special education of the students. But she would rather that money was paid as interest to Westpac bank. Of course it was a mistake it was wrong and we have it in our power to fix it. 
One of the things that that member will do when she has been around here for a bit longer will be to say that sometimes people make mistakes and that they should admit to them. I admit that I made a mistake in that area. I should have convinced my colleagues to fix it; I was reminded of it by the new principal. I have taken up that advice and I will continue to do it. 
Having said all of that the Education Amendment Bill is pretty good. It is not perfect and there are a few things that could have been improved but it is pretty good. The Labour Party will support it notwithstanding the bad grace of the Minister throughout the passage of the bill.